PDA

View Full Version : Can we come to a compromise? - My respec proposal



Borror0
03-11-2009, 04:31 AM
Well, with all the arguing back and forth, I figured I could try to post a proposal and see how both sides would agree with it.

Oh, and sorry to start another thread...

Goals:

Allowing players to adapt to game change.
Being affordable for everyone, casual and hardcore alike.
Trying to address (or reduce) some of the anti-respec fears.
Avoiding hundreds of nearly uncodable restrictions.

Basic idea:
When a character has to respec, he talks to an NPC (I'll leave the aspect lore out for now) that pops out the equivalent of the character creation screen. The players rebuilds the character as he would wants it to be (he can only use, as starting class, a class he had levels of previously however). Once the player is done, he confirms his choice and his character is transformed back to a level 1 character of the class he picked.

The NPC also gives him 'class level token' for each class levels he had. For an example, a level 16 fighter will be given 15 'fighter class tokens'. For a 14 wizard/2 rogue that picked rogue as starting class, he will receive 14 'wizard class tokens' and 1 'rogue class token'. (This could be changed into a percentage of tokens if necessary.)

The character can then use them by talking to a training to level back up. So, a level 16 fighter only wanting to respec his skill points or ability scores just has to respec the way he was all the way to level 16 by talking to the fighter trainer (each time you talk to the trainer a token is consumed). Since each token is class specific, the character is limited to respec back into the class he had. If he wants to change some of his class levels, he will have to gain those levels by collecting XP.

Favor, tomes and equipment are kept.

In order to avoid the respec mechanism to be used as a quick way to skip a few levels, the token would have a Maximum Level at which they could be used and would be destroyed if the character still has some upon reaching that level (for example, if a 16 fighter respec into 14ftr/2pal, then his two remaining fighter token will be destroyed upon reaching level 16.

Since this means we will rerun quests more often, it would be nice if the 'You have run this quest too many times' message would slowly decay over time. This would avoid running into a scenario were all the low level quests would have been ran to death in a few years (ie it's not a priority but it will have to be done at one point in time0.

Timer:
I like either of those two proposals:

Fixed one to two month timer
Smaller timer, at first, but goes up with frequency use (and slowly reduces if not used)
I'd like to mention, though, that in both cases the timer would only start when the last class level token is used or destroyed. All the time that may lapse between the two will count as an 'additional timer', punishing those who are trying to regain more levels in a new class more than others.

Cost:
I will not list any distribution of cost, here, but I'll at least explain what I think should be done. Since this is an ability some lower level characters may be interested in using, a scaling cost would make sense - like Turbine did with Dragonshard. After all, the cost of rerolling gets higher the higher level we are and DDO needs more moneysinks.

The cost should be high but not out of reach for casual gamers to be able to afford it.

Advantages:

Does not seem impossible to code.
Can easily be used to adapt game changes.
Increases the quantity of players at lower levels.*
Reduces the cheesiness by making it a pain to change class drastically.
Mimics more closely (although not perfectly) the tested models found in other MMOs.

*Since there is no restriction as to what levels one has to use his tokens, most players will retrain their new class levels at lower levels.

Disadvantages:

Does not totally prevent drastic class changes.
Reduces some of the game's grind.

Final words:
This, to me, sounds like a nice compromise between the two sides. Of course, I am biased so I am interested by the input of the those sides. However, the question I ask is not 'Should there be a respec?' but rather 'If Turbine was to implement a respec, would this be something you would oppose? If so, what would you want them to change and why?' since all the first question can lead to is a pointless debate on cost vs benefits, when none of us knows the cost.

Hopefully, we can stay civil and try to come to a proposal both sides can agree with by listening to the problems we see in this proposal and trying to fix them.

PS: Again, really sorry to start another thread but otherwise this would have been lost in the pro vs anti arguments.

FluffyCalico
03-11-2009, 04:35 AM
Getting warmer

still have a few issues though

here is one
"The NPC also gives him 'class level token' for each class levels he had. For an example, a level 16 fighter will be given 15 'fighter class tokens'. For a 14 wizard/2 rogue that picked rogue as starting class, he will receive 14 'wizard class tokens' and 1 'rogue class token'. (This could be changed into a percentage of tokens if necessary.)"

So if I am a 16 wizard I can do this and then level up to level 5 and then pop my 15 tokens and be 20 without workng for 17-20?

I know this is not what you intended but we need something to prevent this.

How are you addressing tomes? Specifically INT

Damionic
03-11-2009, 04:35 AM
Works for me...Signed

Borror0
03-11-2009, 04:45 AM
Getting warmer
Good. :)

So if I am a 16 wizard I can do this and then level up to level 5 and then pop my 15 tokens and be 20 without workng for 17-20?

I know this is not what you intended but we need something to prevent this.
I addressed this in the OP (although maybe not at the best place):

"In order to avoid the respec mechanism to be used as a quick way to skip a few levels, the token would have a Maximum Level at which they could be used and would be destroyed if the character still has some upon reaching that level (for example, if a 16 fighter respec into 14ftr/2pal, then his two remaining fighter token will be destroyed upon reaching level 16."
How are you addressing tomes? Specifically INT
Well, since there are already people who can use +2 tomes at level I figured respec'ing would keep whatever Int tome and consider you ate it at lv 1.

I personally don't view this as unbalancing. No idea if I am part of a few but it would save a lot of headaches, though.

FluffyCalico
03-11-2009, 04:49 AM
Good. :)


Well, since there are already people who can use +2 tomes at level I figured respec'ing would keep whatever Int tome and consider you ate it at lv 1.

I personally don't view this as unbalancing. No idea if I am part of a few but it would save a lot of headaches, though.

Issue with this is then if you ate a int tome after level 1 you NEED to respec just to gain the points from previous levels. While I don't think super punishment is needed for respec I can't support a reward for doing it beond correcting mistakes or changes in the game.
Perhaps all toons reguardless should get back int skill points when they eat a tome.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 04:51 AM
Perhaps all toons reguardless should get back int skill points when they eat a tome.
That would be a way.

bandyman1
03-11-2009, 04:59 AM
I think it addresses most of the concerns of both sides of the debate.

Good idea Borr. And good compromise.

I agree with Fluffy that a few things may need to be ironed out, but I really don't see how anyone could seriously be opposed to this system.

FluffyCalico
03-11-2009, 05:05 AM
I think it addresses most of the concerns of both sides of the debate.

Good idea Borr. And good compromise.

I agree with Fluffy that a few things may need to be ironed out, but I really don't see how anyone could seriously be opposed to this system.

Oh trust me I won't use it, but As long as the int tome issue is delt with then I can pretend this respec guy isn't there.

sephiroth1084
03-11-2009, 05:22 AM
Well, one of the prominent writers of 3.5 wrote somewhere in a response on the WotC site (specific, I know) that, were he to go back, he'd make permanent changes to intelligence affect skill points retroactively.

I think that translating this to DDO would be a good idea.

As far as your respec idea goes, Borr, I think I like it, with the caveat that something would have to be done about skill points if the retroactive Int thing isn't dealt with otherwise--I don't want to see everyone hit the respec button the moment they get a +1, +2, +3, etc... Int tome. Nor do I want this to happen at lvls 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 for wizards and other Int-based characters.

Would you be able to select the number of levels you want to drop at a time? You might have said so and I missed it, it's early/late and I haven't slept yet.

This would have to be significantly more expensive than feat respec if that is to remain a functional option in the game. Sure, it'd be easier to respec a single feat taken at 3 on a lvl 16 character via Fred, but if you have to respec more than one feat, this becomes much better. Then, if any of those feats have prereqs you need to deal with as well, this becomes much much better.

Not sure what you meant about the timer and token interaction. Were you saying that the timer starts immediately or when the last token is turned in/destroyed?

The coding for tokens that are destroyed upon reaching the appropriate level seems like it would be clunky, though I'm no programmer. There has to be a more elegant solution to that. Perhaps having each token specify a class and level?

So, for example, a level 5 fighter decides that he wants some paladin levels. He respecs and gets 5 fighter tokens, each marked lvls 1-5. He trades in the lvl 1 token to become a Fighter 1, the lvl 2 for fighter at 2. Then at 3, he takes a level of paladin. Next lvl, he trades in the fighter 4 token, which checks to make sure that he is lvl 3. He is, so he is now a F 3/P1, distributed as F,F,P,F. If he takes his next level in paladin, his lvl 5 fighter token will be useless unless he decides to repsec again.

Looking at that, I can see several problems, but I'm leaving it up as something for you (and anyone else) to mull over in case there is some gem in there.

Ultimately, I think that a long timer, coupled with having to actually relevel drastically changed characters (and the locking in of the first level according to a level you have already) avoids most of the issues I would have with a full respec.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 05:42 AM
I think that translating this to DDO would be a good idea.
Well, you won't seem me disagreeing.

Would you be able to select the number of levels you want to drop at a time? You might have said so and I missed it
Do you mean to what level you go back to? I said you were forced back to level 1.

This would have to be significantly more expensive than feat respec if that is to remain a functional option in the game.
You won't see me disagreeing to that either.

Were you saying that the timer starts immediately or when the last token is turned in/destroyed?
When the last token is turned in or destroyed.

That way, it penalizes more those respecing more levels by setting a "longer timer'.

The coding for tokens that are destroyed upon reaching the appropriate level seems like it would be clunky, though I'm no programmer.
That is the only way I found to prevent players from collecting tokens.

If that is not seen as problematic, then they could code a 'maximum level' to it a bit in way they coded a minimum level?

baylensman
03-11-2009, 09:22 AM
It seems a great compromise to me.
So in this scenario 10 Pally 3 sorc 3 fighter having started as a pally

lvl 1 pal with 9 pally tokens 3 sorc 3 ftr .
I could then take the tokens in any order?
I could toss the 3 sorc ,and level throuh 10 ranks of pally and three of fighter and stop
at 13 ,then re-level as normal for the final three taking whatever I wanted?

I think that the process should be contigious. When you level and get your tokens you don't level your 16 up to say six then go play a few quest then come back and level some more. It should be all at one time, that way the tokens drop when you leave the NPC, the same way keys and other items do now when you leave a quest.
This would mean that you must have a well thought out plan, due to the fact that when you leave your stuck with the build for better or worse until the timer kicks in.

I like the idea of a timer, but I think the spread should be greater Say once every six months.

I think the problem with stats is minor, so what if a rogue gets 19 intel and 19 dex at level 1, he won't be playing any level one quests. So bassicaly feats would like the current feat repec system, only some of the minor abilities would really change.

I think with a little tweaking this is the best idea ive read yet.

Again good job

Borror0
03-11-2009, 09:26 AM
When you level and get your tokens you don't level your 16 up to say six then go play a few quest then come back and level some more. It should be all at one time, that way the tokens drop when you leave the NPC, the same way keys and other items do now when you leave a quest.
Sadly, we can't have that since the order at which you take your levels may matter for skills and some feats.

I like the idea of a timer, but I think the spread should be greater Say once every six months.
Honestly, the timer varies a lot on how often Turbine updates the game.

The best would be a 1.5-2 months timer, when they used to update the game every month. Sadly, we don't have that. =/

feynman
03-11-2009, 09:30 AM
/not signed

Sorry, still pulling for character age or other mechanism to force respec/reroll. Short of that, I disagree with any cost or limitation on respec.

Aspenor
03-11-2009, 09:39 AM
/not signed

Sorry, still pulling for character age or other mechanism to force respec/reroll. Short of that, I disagree with any cost or limitation on respec.

right, so every character in stormreach is an elf or drow. that makes a lot of sense......

oh, and nobody builds melees, because with age you lose 1 STR, 1 DEX and 1 CON, and gain 1 WIS, INT and CHA.

and human characters seldomly see more than 6 months of game-time life.

yeah, right. terrible idea.

EazyWeazy
03-11-2009, 09:59 AM
Great work Bor and a wonderful compromise of the two sides. I really hope that someone from Turbine takes notice of your efforts. Thank you. :)

Thanimal
03-11-2009, 10:04 AM
Wow, this is excellent.

I am very pro respec -- I believe it is necessary for the long-term health of a game and for player retention.

HOWEVER, I recognize that it is possible to implement respec in such a way as to completely ruin a game. At one extreme end, completely free respecs of everything actually destroy the entire NOTION of a character. Each player would have one character and simply morph it into whatever was optimal for a given quest. So the answer lies between the extremes of "no respec possible" and "unlimited free respecs."

DDO's character build system is more complicated than any other MMO (which is exactly why I play it), so designing a respec system that is at the optimal peak between the too horrible extremes is NOT easy.

I think you may have just done it! I'm gonna keep mulling it over to see if I can think of any specific issues or suggest tweaks.

But I'm pretty sure this is, at a high level, the right answer. Hope Turbine is reading this!!

Kintro
03-11-2009, 10:06 AM
Why not just make them regain all the XP? This, combined with first time bonuses and the "You have repeated this quest X times" mechanism, would limit the frequency people would be able to respec.

Some benefits:

1) more low/mid level content being run as people relevel
2) more of the less popular quests being run (repeated STK 15 times, where do we go this time?)
3) less coding (no need for tokens)

Cinwulf
03-11-2009, 10:10 AM
To me one of the main points of a respec would be to keep me from having to loose all my experience in the first place. I can't play as much as some, or even as much as I would like. Loosing all xp on a respec would be the same as delete and reroll to me.

edit: I like your suggestion Borror0

Aspenor
03-11-2009, 10:11 AM
To me one of the main points of a respec would be to keep me from having to loose all my experience in the first place. I can't play as much as some, or even as much as I would like. Loosing all xp on a respec would be the same as delete and reroll to me.

edit: I like your suggestion Borro

agreed 100%

Thanimal
03-11-2009, 10:11 AM
Why not just make them regain all the XP? This, combined with first time bonuses and the "You have repeated this quest X times" mechanism, would limit the frequency people would be able to respec.

Some benefits:

1) more low/mid level content being run as people relevel
2) more of the less popular quests being run (repeated STK 15 times, where do we go this time?)
3) less coding (no need for tokens)

Not to say there are no disadvantages, but the advantage of Borror0's proposal is that it's a fairly small barrier to a n00b who just screws up. Making a casual player completely regain XP to correct an error is, in my opinion, more likely to make him/her give up and quit the game. Borror0's proposal does force re-leveling for a true change of direction, which I think is appropriate and possibly even a requirement of any respec system. But re-leveling for "oops I'm an idiot" respecs is too high a bar in my opinion.

nytewolf
03-11-2009, 10:12 AM
Not sure if this has been addressed but since changes are being made in MOD 9 that can potentially affect all characters (Capstones being the major one) For those against Respecs what about Turbine setting up a one time per character respec that must be usable within a certain time frame to allow corrections due to game changes for all characters active before MOD 9 release. Then down the line if other major changes to game play happen they can offer the same thing again. This would keep things under tighter control would it not?

FluffyCalico
03-11-2009, 10:14 AM
Why not just make them regain all the XP? This, combined with first time bonuses and the "You have repeated this quest X times" mechanism, would limit the frequency people would be able to respec.

Some benefits:

1) more low/mid level content being run as people relevel
2) more of the less popular quests being run (repeated STK 15 times, where do we go this time?)
3) less coding (no need for tokens)

Hm I think I like that. Once you burn up GH level 9-13 is going to have to be worked for.

Dexxaan
03-11-2009, 10:20 AM
I believe it´s a good way to implement some of the needed changes people want in their builds.


I do believe that once the cap is at 20; the rules and all Pre´s are out...then you get your respec-coupon and you get 1 (maybe 2 shots for those who´ll whine they screwed up the 1st time :rolleyes:)

After that it´s over...you get your chance at changing some non-core build features and stop complaining.

If in the future you really want to do this again then you contact Premium Services and dish out say $ 60+ per Toon, and you get a new respec coupon.

Anything else is abusive IMO.

Thanimal
03-11-2009, 10:21 AM
Ya know, what I want to do is to try to play Evil Abuser Guy, and see if we can come up with some way to do something unintended or undesirable under this proposal.

I'm not sure I'm quite Evil enough to do this, but I'm gonna try anyhow. I'm posting this publicly in case anybody more Evil than I can find a way to abuse.

Then Borror0 can patch any holes NOW instead of the usual mad scramble to patch holes after a new system goes live.

I think the main evil thing I want to try to do is figure out some way to re-optimize my character for each phase of the game. (I realize this isn't the most evil thing possible, but it feels like the most promising line of "attack" to show some weakness in this proposal.)

To some extent, this is already possible. A friend is leveling a Ranger currently and swapping favored enemies around pretty much every time the respec timer runs out. Although this is midly cheesy, I don't think it really harms the game and is far from the cheesiest thing out there anyhow.

But might a broader respec elevate minor cheesiness into something more objectionable? To be honest, I can't think of how under Borror0's proposal. But perhaps somebody else can?

Thanimal
03-11-2009, 10:26 AM
I do believe that once the cap is at 20; the rules and all Pre´s are out...then you get your respec-coupon and you get 1 (maybe 2 shots for those who´ll whine they screwed up the 1st time :rolleyes:)

I disagree because an MMO must continue to evolve or it dies out. So I hope that DDO will never reach a completely static state where there is never again a need to adapt your build to the changes in the world. I think that would surely be worse for the game than allowing respecs. :)

Cinwulf
03-11-2009, 10:30 AM
I disagree because an MMO must continue to evolve or it dies out. So I hope that DDO will never reach a completely static state where there is never again a need to adapt your build to the changes in the world. I think that would surely be worse for the game than allowing respecs. :)

Exactly, the respec should be used as a tool by both the developers and players to continue to improve the game.

Marabias
03-11-2009, 10:31 AM
You could just drop the tokens all together. Have what almost looks like exp from when we used to lose exp from death. Every time you talk to a trainer if you take the class you had for that level before it could just pop your exp up to the next level for the next trainer. If you change classes for a level you get no exp and must level. So you only level for the levels you change classes. So even if a 16 fighter wanted to change over to a 16 sorc they would have to level all the way to 16.

Dexxaan
03-11-2009, 10:34 AM
No one is talking about "Completely Static States", yet the comfort of knowing Daddy Turbine is going to save my Toon everytime is called Paternalism and I do not support it more than once.

Design a build, Invest in it, but don´t swap (sell out) your essence for the sake of a Flavor of the month, nor because "everyone else wants it and is doing it"

/puke.

Jay203
03-11-2009, 10:35 AM
i still think it's more fun to watch them squirm until they eventually suck it up to reroll :D
part of the fun should be bringing your toon up, if you're not having fun playing a character, why make it? :O

Thanimal
03-11-2009, 10:37 AM
Since this means we will rerun quests more often, it would be nice if the 'You have run this quest too many times' message would slowly decay over time. This would avoid running into a scenario were all the low level quests would have been ran to death in a few years (ie it's not a priority but it will have to be done at one point in time0.

I'm not *quite* sold on this particular detail. To some extent, the possibility of eventually exhausting *all* of the leveling content could be a barrier to long-term abuse of respecs. At some point, I may be OK with saying "Ok, you've completely reworked this character and releveled it 5 times. 'Obviously' you didn't just make a mistake and are instead abusing the system. Now you are forced to start a new character if you want to non-trivially respec yet again."

Finally, I would hope that new content will continue to be added at all levels, so if you wait long enough, you'll have *something* to run.

So I may be OK with NOT making a change here, and allowing this to be a subtle barrier to long-term abuse.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 10:56 AM
"""*Since there is no restriction as to what levels one has to use his tokens, most players will retrain their new class levels at lower levels."""



So instead of a player paying the XP cost as would normally be required from being at a higher level, allow them to exploit the system to use the lowest possible XP cost from the lower levels even if that character had already attained higher levels with that original character.


2-3 month timer(or less) to allow players to adapt to changes in game? If mods are put out in a 4-6 month period then it is not about adaptation as claimed since nothing is being changed so drastically that a player would need the chance to change their character multiple times between mods.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 10:57 AM
Finally, I would hope that new content will continue to be added at all levels, so if you wait long enough, you'll have *something* to run.
It still creates a problem between rerollee and new characters. New characters may not want to do quests with bad XP. There are better ways to make players run more content than the usual stuff but I don't think it should be included in the respec.

oogly54
03-11-2009, 10:59 AM
/not signed

What comprimise?

This is still all about the loot. Iit is not about some build mistake it is about loot. If your toon had zero loot you would re-roll them in a second if you found a flaw you didnt like. But because you have X number of pieces of raid loot you wont do it. I am in favor of this if ALL loot is destroyed at respec. The problem is nobody else would be in favor of this becasue this is still all about the loot. I am not in favor of this if you received zero respec tokens and had to grind XP back to level cap 100%. XP is not a limiting factor. Plat is not a limiting factor. If this is for the casual gamer who plays 5 hours a week, they don't have the stacks of uber loot anyway, so a respec that eliminates loot won't hurt them.

Someone stated in a previous thread that they are in favor of a respec becasue they only have one toon they play. They have finally gotten every piece of loot they want but they made some poor decisions while creating the toon so it is not perfect. They wish that that toon was perfect and want to have a re-roll to do so. What does that person do after that toon is perfect? What keeps them playing? There is no point to running that perfect toon any longer. Do you roll another toon? Isn't that the same as re-rolling? We need motavation to keep playing and striving to make the perfect toon is it. Eliminating that journey towards the perfect toon eliminates the need to play at all.

I will not agree to a respec that allows a faster method to the perfect toon with all the perfect gear to go with it. Is there a game out there that takes less time to get to cap?

Grenfell
03-11-2009, 11:04 AM
Please don't respond to the unhelpful /puke comments and whatnot -- they don't help drive the debate forward in either direction (pro and anti).

Borror -- FWIW, I think this is relatively close to what I've been considering. However, the token system does appear rather clunky to me. Plus, it isn't clear that this sort of respec is painful *enough*.

What I would do, perhaps, is modify it slightly as follows:

(1) When Mod 9 is released, every character then in-game receives a FCR token. Popping this token brings you to the Character Creation screen, you create the character as you want (a lvl 1), then when you select "Done", you re-enter the game with all the XP, loot, items, favor, etc. that you had. This is the so-called "Reincarnation Option".

This particular FCR is a one-time only deal to recognize that three years of DDO has passed. This FCR token disappears in 2 week's time and must be used by then.

(2) After this one-time "reset button", then the actual respec mechanism replaces your tokens concept with more of a Fred the Mindflayer concept.

You go speak with an NPC (on a 7-day timer) and select a level to reset, and a class to respec into. Doing this brings up the familiar "level-up" screen where you go and make various choices.

The cost for doing this scales with the level of the character doing the reset and the # of times someone is respec'ing.

Costs include Plat + Collectible (like the Siberys Shard), and can conceivably get quite costly after repetition.

For example:

First reset - 1 Respec Shard + 5K gold/lvl of respec'ing character
Second reset - 2 Respec Shards + 10K gold/lvl
Third reset - 3 Respec Shards + 20k gold/lvl
Fourth reset - 4 Respec Shards + 40k gold/lvl (doubles each time - steep curve)

etc.

So under this, a newer player who didn't really know what he was doing, started out as a paladin, got to lvl 4 and saw he didn't have much SP's so decided to take lvl 5 as Sorceror for huge SP gain, isn't severely punished.

At lvl 6, if he respecs that mistaken sorc level, his cost is 1 Shard + 30k gold. Not extreme. He's back to being a full pally, and goes merrily on this way.

A veteran who wants to respec several levels, however, faces some challenges. Let's just say that someone has a build (like mine) that is currently a 12r/3pal/1mnk and wants to remove those 3 pally levels.

That would require, first, 21 days to complete (7 day timer in between respecs). Hardly a "flavor of the month".

Second, three total resets leads to:

First respec = 1 Shard + 80k gold
Second respec = 2 shards + 160k gold
Third respec = 3 shards + 320k gold

And that's assuming I don't level past 16 on that character for three weeks.

If I'm fickle, get to 20, and decide I want those pally levels back, now it's another three weeks, plus:

Fourth respec = 4 Shards + 800k gold
Fifth respec = 5 shards + 1.6m gold
Sixth respec = 6 shards + 3.2m gold

I think this makes going from a 20 Barb to a 20 cleric a prohibitive exercise and reroll would likely be more worthwhile in virtually every situation. It would take, for the record, 140 days, 210 shards, and 105 billion gold to go from a 20 Barb to a 20 Cleric.

/gren

Thanimal
03-11-2009, 11:04 AM
It still creates a problem between rerollee and new characters. New characters may not want to do quests with bad XP. There are better ways to make players run more content than the usual stuff but I don't think it should be included in the respec.

Hm. Good point.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 11:07 AM
So instead of a player paying the XP cost as would normally be required from being at a higher level, allow them to exploit the system to use the lowest possible XP cost from the lower levels even if that character had already attained higher levels with that original character.
Well, I wanted them to run the higher level content too but I thought that increasing the activity at lower levels may be a good side effect.

2-3 month timer(or less) to allow players to adapt to changes in game? If mods are put out in a 4-6 month period then it is not about adaptation as claimed since nothing is being changed so drastically that a player would need the chance to change their character multiple times between mods.
Well, I don't see the point of a timer longer than 2-3 months, really.

Why would someone respec every 1-3 months if there was no update at all? What is there to gain? It may be me not seeing something obvious but I don't see the problem with being able to respec once every month. If the timer was too short, I could see why but we are talking about one month.

Not saying you are wrong but rather that I don't see it.

PS: A bit OT but I think M9 was an exception and we're not going to have such a lnog wait for other modules.

Thanimal
03-11-2009, 11:15 AM
So instead of a player paying the XP cost as would normally be required from being at a higher level, allow them to exploit the system to use the lowest possible XP cost from the lower levels even if that character had already attained higher levels with that original character.

I *think* you are misinterpretting a detail here -- or else I am misinterpretting your point. Suppose you are Fighter 16 and you want to get to Fighter 16/Paladin 1. (I don't know why; just an example.)

If you do this through the proposed respec system, you *could* choose to go all the way back to Fighter 1, then get Paladin 1 "the easy way" by running low level quests, and then re-level to Fighter 15/Paladin 1 with your tokens. BUT, according to my understanding of Borror0's proposal, your remaining token is "labeled" as 16-or-under and cannot be used to level to 17 as a Fighter 16/Paladin 1. To get to 17, you still have to play as a level 16 in high level content.

In the end, you've actually done strictly MORE work than simply running your Fighter 16 to level 17 and then choosing Paladin.

So I don't think there is abuse potential there, but again I may be missing your point.

Turial
03-11-2009, 11:19 AM
/not signed

What comprimise?

This is still all about the loot. Iit is not about some build mistake it is about loot. If your toon had zero loot you would re-roll them in a second if you found a flaw you didnt like. But because you have X number of pieces of raid loot you wont do it. I am in favor of this if ALL loot is destroyed at respec. The problem is nobody else would be in favor of this becasue this is still all about the loot. I am not in favor of this if you received zero respec tokens and had to grind XP back to level cap 100%. XP is not a limiting factor. Plat is not a limiting factor. If this is for the casual gamer who plays 5 hours a week, they don't have the stacks of uber loot anyway, so a respec that eliminates loot won't hurt them.


How about a Legacy token system that works in addition to Borror0's respec system? For each Legacy token you find/earn you would be able to keep 1 bound item or 1 previously used tome. This system would mandate that a respec removed all bound loot etc and a respec means starting over wealth wise.

Tie these tokens into the game some how that is less efficient for powergamers to accumulate them but likely that a more casual gamer might accumulate them so that a casual gamer could keep the 1 or 2 nice things that they have found if they choose to respec.

Gunga
03-11-2009, 11:22 AM
Very nice job. You've obviously put a lot of time into this.

I don't agree with the concept of not being accountable for your choices, but I do appreciate the work you've done.

Dexxaan
03-11-2009, 11:26 AM
Please don't respond to the unhelpful /puke comments and whatnot -- they don't help drive the debate forward in either direction (pro and anti)......snip....

Fourth respec = 4 Shards + 800k gold
Fifth respec = 5 shards + 1.6m gold
Sixth respec = 6 shards + 3.2m gold

I think this makes going from a 20 Barb to a 20 cleric a prohibitive exercise and reroll would likely be more worthwhile in virtually every situation. It would take, for the record, 140 days, 210 shards, and 10.5 billion gold to go from a 20 Barb to a 20 Cleric.

/gren

I have no authority to tell people to not pay attention/respond to your post, (Neither do you; yet I believe in allowing people to form a criteria...in whichever way they can and is available) But do consider this as a major augmentation to an already out of control Plat Farming Frenzy.

/cough

Hafeal
03-11-2009, 11:39 AM
I like it as a compromise position, I have to think about some of the details in greater depth with a little more time. Nice work outlining it Bor.

I think a major issue with skills and INT is that DDO does not keep track of the tomes you ate according to dev post from oh so long ago. So, DDO has no way of knowing if you ate +1, +2 or +3 or when. Now you could retroactively go back and figure that out on an individual basis - but to do it for the masses would be tough.

Thus, I think you have to bite the bullet and give no tome increases (which make people very unhappy) or allow them a higher intelligence at level 1 than they otherwise would have had (which some will claim as balance disrupting). I do not have a solution for this at the moment, perhaps BorroO has an idea on this?

rimble
03-11-2009, 11:42 AM
Well, since there are already people who can use +2 tomes at level I figured respec'ing would keep whatever Int tome and consider you ate it at lv 1.

I personally don't view this as unbalancing. No idea if I am part of a few but it would save a lot of headaches, though.

Yup, I've been saying it forever...stop stressing the Int tomes, there's no reason it should be the only non-retroactive tome. Just leave it be if something like this is implemented.

Gunga
03-11-2009, 11:43 AM
I think I might be swayed to move over to the FOR a respec column if there was more of a consequence. Public consequence. Maybe their armor never shows up on their left foot anymore, or a big pink X shows up on their forehead or maybe they forever wear a dunce cap.


Then I could point at any of Mhykke's toons when I see him and yell, "Repecer!" And so could the newb who never did.

Yaga_Nub
03-11-2009, 11:45 AM
....

Timer:
I like either of those two proposals:

Fixed SIX MONTH timer
Smaller timer, at first, but goes up with frequency use (and retraining enhancements counts as a respec for timer purposes)
I'd like to mention, though, that in both cases the timer would only start when the last class level token is used or destroyed. All the time that may lapse between the two will count as an 'additional timer', punishing those who are trying to regain more levels in a new class more than others.

....

Bor, I could get onboard with this one if you went with one of my options for the duration between respecs.

Dexxaan
03-11-2009, 11:47 AM
I think I might be swayed to move over to the FOR a respec column if there was more of a consequence. Public consequence. Maybe their armor never shows up on their left foot anymore, or a big pink X shows up on their forehead or maybe they forever wear a dunce cap.


Then I could point at any of Mhykke's toons when I see him and yell, "Repecer!" And so could the newb who never did.

/Agreed & ROFL.

Edit: How about a big pink X for every Respec performed.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 11:47 AM
Thus, I think you have to bite the bullet and give no tome increases (which make people very unhappy) or allow them a higher intelligence at level 1 than they otherwise would have had (which some will claim as balance disrupting). I do not have a solution for this at the moment, perhaps BorroO has an idea on this?
Well, there is no real reasons as to why skill tomes are the non-retroactive tomes.

Why should Int be different?

Borror0
03-11-2009, 11:49 AM
Bor, I could get onboard with this one if you went with one of my options for the duration between respecs.
Yaga, as I said to Quanefel, what is so unbalancing with the ability to respec every two months?

Yaga_Nub
03-11-2009, 11:50 AM
Yaga, as I said to Quanefel, what is so unbalancing with the ability to respec every two months?

Because you're using the idea that the game changes have caused the need for a respec. Well the game doesn't change enough every two months to have the need for a respec every two months.

As a justification you could just write I want this because I want respecs and then every two months would be fine except then I, for one, wouldn't support respecs because that's a horrible reason for respecs. :D

Borror0
03-11-2009, 11:53 AM
Well the game doesn't change enough every two months to have the need for a respec every two months.
True but it does it really need to be longer? Why make it longer than it needs to be?

What if updates become more frequent?

rimble
03-11-2009, 11:55 AM
Because you're using the idea that the game changes have caused the need for a respec. Well the game doesn't change enough every two months to have the need for a respec every two months.

As a justification you could just write I want this because I want respecs and then every two months would be fine except then I, for one, wouldn't support respecs because that's a horrible reason for respecs. :D

Some other game...City of Heroes maybe...? Usually gave respecs out after every update, that made alot of sense to me. They also gave a few out as treats...Anniversay Gifts, Christmas Gifts, and so on.

Oh yeah, and you should be able to respec your 28pt build to 32pts. Then we can finally put that horse to rest.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 11:55 AM
Yup, I've been saying it forever...stop stressing the Int tomes, there's no reason it should be the only non-retroactive tome. Just leave it be if something like this is implemented.

No. If any idea like this is to be even considered then disregarding any type of balance is out of the question. You or others might not think balance is important but the Dev's do. Part of their job IS to keep balance. Not because they are mean, but it's because they have to. I know that idea upsets people or people could care less about balance. Let them work out the details to make that feature not unbalancing even if it is not exactly they way we want it to be.

And consider mod 9+ will have unbound +3 and maybe +4 tomes. At that point it will not matter since we can just eat one after respeccing back down to level 1 or rerolling back and eating it at level one. Both would be equal and balanced to each other then. A non-issue at that point.

Cinwulf
03-11-2009, 11:56 AM
True but it does it really need to be longer? Why make it longer than it needs to be?

What if updates become more frequent?


I'd be happy with once per update after the initial one.

rimble
03-11-2009, 11:58 AM
No. If any idea like this is to be even considered then disregarding any type of balance is out of the question. You or others might not think balance is important but the Dev's do. Part of their job IS to keep balance. Not because they are mean, but it's because they have to. I know that idea upsets people or people could care less about balance. Let them work out the details to make that feature not unbalancing even if it is not exactly they way we want it to be.

And consider mod 9+ will have unbound +3 and maybe +4 tomes. At that point it will not matter since we can just eat one after respeccing back down to level 1 or rerolling back and eating it at level one. Both would be equal and balanced to each other then. A non-issue at that point.

Non-retroactive Int tomes isn't a balancing mechanism...it's just a game design flaw. How do we go back and keep track of what class you were at each level and let you spend the skill points with the appropriate cost for that level after you just ate an Int tome at level 16? It's not worth the design headache or keeping large data structures of every characters exact level progression. Even PnP doesn't try it because it's too much bookkeeping. But starting over at level 1, and leaving the tome in place, negates that dilemma.

Thrudh
03-11-2009, 12:06 PM
Why not just make them regain all the XP? This, combined with first time bonuses and the "You have repeated this quest X times" mechanism, would limit the frequency people would be able to respec.

Some benefits:

1) more low/mid level content being run as people relevel
2) more of the less popular quests being run (repeated STK 15 times, where do we go this time?)
3) less coding (no need for tokens)

I like this idea....

Borror0
03-11-2009, 12:06 PM
If any idea like this is to be even considered then disregarding any type of balance is out of the question.
Please explain how that is unbalancing.

Thrudh
03-11-2009, 12:08 PM
I'm not *quite* sold on this particular detail. To some extent, the possibility of eventually exhausting *all* of the leveling content could be a barrier to long-term abuse of respecs. At some point, I may be OK with saying "Ok, you've completely reworked this character and releveled it 5 times. 'Obviously' you didn't just make a mistake and are instead abusing the system. Now you are forced to start a new character if you want to non-trivially respec yet again."

Finally, I would hope that new content will continue to be added at all levels, so if you wait long enough, you'll have *something* to run.

So I may be OK with NOT making a change here, and allowing this to be a subtle barrier to long-term abuse.

I think this is an interesting idea too as a way to limit respecs

Thrudh
03-11-2009, 12:13 PM
I like it as a compromise position, I have to think about some of the details in greater depth with a little more time. Nice work outlining it Bor.

I think a major issue with skills and INT is that DDO does not keep track of the tomes you ate according to dev post from oh so long ago. So, DDO has no way of knowing if you ate +1, +2 or +3 or when. Now you could retroactively go back and figure that out on an individual basis - but to do it for the masses would be tough.

Thus, I think you have to bite the bullet and give no tome increases (which make people very unhappy) or allow them a higher intelligence at level 1 than they otherwise would have had (which some will claim as balance disrupting). I do not have a solution for this at the moment, perhaps BorroO has an idea on this?

They do know if you read a tome and it's plus... they just don't track when...

So if you've used a +2 tome at anytime on your level 16 character, the idea is to just give it to you at level 1.

cforce
03-11-2009, 12:16 PM
To add my two cents:

I like it!

I'd also agree with some other folks that it would make sense to allow for repeat respecs City of Heroes style: you get a fixed number of "lifetime" respec tokens per character creation, but tokens can be replenished by 1 whenever updates change build decisions. (Which is most updates.)

So, give every character, say, 3 tokens. If an update makes changes, and you have less than 3 tokens, you get +1. If you run out, no more respecs until the next game-changing update.

smatt
03-11-2009, 12:16 PM
A Tiered approach with no freebies....

One time only for each one.

1. Respec Race = Lose all bound items

2. Respec Classes = Stays at current level but must reaquire XP back to current XP before leveling any higher.

3. Respec Stats = Lose all consumed Tomes bound and unbound

4. Respec skills = No loss

Simple, not free, no easy button for those that simply want to be better, give the poor whittle nerfed builds ( How many are those that are are so devasting?) a chance to fix themselves up.

EinarMal
03-11-2009, 12:18 PM
They do know if you read a tome and it's plus... they just don't track when...

So if you've used a +2 tome at anytime on your level 16 character, the idea is to just give it to you at level 1.

They should (and should always have had) min levels on tomes and that is problem solved.

+1 Tome (Level 1)
+2 Tome (Level 6)
+3 Tome (Level 11)
+4 Tome (Level 16)
+5 Tome (Level 20)

Put them back into your inventory, but you can't use them until the proper level.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 12:19 PM
Well, I wanted them to run the higher level content too but I thought that increasing the activity at lower levels may be a good side effect.

Well, I don't see the point of a timer longer than 2-3 months, really.

Why would someone respec every 1-3 months if there was no update at all? What is there to gain? It may be me not seeing something obvious but I don't see the problem with being able to respec once every month. If the timer was too short, I could see why but we are talking about one month.

Not saying you are wrong but rather that I don't see it.

PS: A bit OT but I think M9 was an exception and we're not going to have such a lnog wait for other modules.

That might very well be so but I do not think allowing for XP to be cherry picked from the lowest level range a player can. It creates imbalance and an unfair advantage with other players. And it reeks of abuse.

If a person had a character of 15 ftr/2 cleric and wanted to retrain that 2 levels of cleric into a 17th level ftr then they are essentially removing that level with their base level at 15. They should not get to pick the XP range of first to second level, they should reseasonable be expected to gain XP from their base class level that is left, the 15th ftr level and work back up. If another player who is the same level has to gain XP of that higher level range, so should the respecced character at the same exact level is. Makes sense? It is not too unreasonable to ask them to gain XP normally like anyone else in the same situation who did not respec at that level range. And it helps keeps balance and prevents any quick change over to a newer levels of a class on the fly.


The timer is too short because it does create that FoTM scene many wish to avoid, including the Dev's. Players are crafty, ok? We find new builds or ways to exploit the system almost all the time. Do not put in something that makes it obvious a better way to exploit the game further. If mods take 4-6 months at a time then allowing respecs to take place multiple times between updates/patches it only makes it worse. Since the Dev's have no way to fix those exploits in that amount of time to address the new issues to recreate some type of balance. I know, balance is not important to some people. It is to the Dev's and in order for them to even consider any offer like this, don't give them something filled with holes, exploits or bugs. Give them something that they might actually want to work with.

Dexxaan
03-11-2009, 12:20 PM
A Tiered approach with no freebies....

One time only for each one.

1. Respec Race = Lose all bound items

2. Respec Classes = Stays at current level but must reaquire XP back to current XP before leveling any higher.

3. Respec Stats = Lose all consumed Tomes bound and unbound

4. Respec skills = No loss

Simple, not free, no easy button for those that simply want to be better, give the poor whittle nerfed builds ( How many are those that are are so devasting?) a chance to fix themselves up.



DING DING DING!


We have a winner.

Now can we end this and the other threads and move on to something a bit more game enhancing?

smatt
03-11-2009, 12:27 PM
DING DING DING!


Now can we end this and the other threads and move on to something a bit more game enhancing?


Now that's funny...... I expect at least 5k more posts and about 20 more threads rehashing the rehashed, mish mash from the same 10 people :D

rimble
03-11-2009, 12:28 PM
Now that's funny...... I expect at least 5k more posts and about 20 more threads rehashing the rehashed, mish mash from the same 10 people :D

The counter rehashed mish-mash always manages to show up again too.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 12:28 PM
A Tiered approach with no freebies...
The problem with that is that they all are harder to code, than a 'start over'.

Zenako
03-11-2009, 12:29 PM
First off have always agreed that a fruitful discussion on implementation could be had IF such an option were to be introduced. Not a bad conception here, but as some have pointed out perhaps a bit clunky with the tokens.

How would the "world" react if the "cost" of the respec included simply losing all inherent bonuses. That would negate the concern about how to implement INT effects and the retroactive/not retroactive nature of it. Use this INSTEAD of any real plat cost, and it will be somewhat proportional to the abillity to pay, and help ensure that only those who truely feel they NEED to do this, will do so. Tomes a pretty much a commodity item amoung those who have plenty these days.

I really like your concept of being able to retain any existing levels, but having to earn levels in any new class (or levels of an old class). Significantly addresses the instant new toon with the same name syndrome.

Make the timer for the character something like 1 week/(max level of the character-1). So a 2nd level character would only have to wait a week, while a capped toon would take almost 4 to 5 months.

I do feel it is very important that the starting race is unchangeable, and the first level is fixed.

But another feature which I know does not matter to some, but does matter to many, would be to allow the "Looks" of the character to be modified at the same time, by opening up the hair/eyes/lips/skin selection page. That would be a big seller for some.

Back to the tokens. Just give the special redo trainors some new dialog. If they have seen you before, "welcome back, how can we help you" when you are in the Redo State. If you have never used them before, "sorry we can't help you yet". Put the whole process in an isolated room like the Dragonmark chamber. When you leave the room, the process ends, and you are locked into whereever you stopped. This avoids any schemes with leveling up low levels of a toon, and then restarting the process to take the higher levels. It is a one stop, start to finish operation, BUT, you can log off an leave your character in that location like you would with a tavern, but you only appear there when you log back in.

smatt
03-11-2009, 12:33 PM
The problem with that is that they all are harder to code, than a 'start over'.


Hmm, not sure about that. at all.....

My point is... IF they did something around this Repec idea... There should be a penalty. I'm sorry Bor, I just don't think there's been HUGE game changing nerfs to any class..... Maybe a littel nerf here and there, but no disasters really. Part of this game is that you have to earn things, it takes work to improve your toons, and it should continue that way.

Timjc86
03-11-2009, 12:38 PM
This is still all about the loot.
No it's not. Loot is certainly an issue, but it's not the sole motivating factor.


The problem is nobody else would be in favor of this becasue this is still all about the loot.
I think there are roughly 50 posts in this thread alone that directly contradict you here.


I am not in favor of this if you received zero respec tokens and had to grind XP back to level cap 100%.
How is this more of an unbearable grind than having to re-craft your greensteels and re-casino any other raid loot you gave up? How are you distinguishing grinding back up to level 16 and grinding back your bound loot? Both seem pretty not-fun to me.


If this is for the casual gamer who plays 5 hours a week, they don't have the stacks of uber loot anyway, so a respec that eliminates loot won't hurt them.
The game has been around for over three years now. That's plenty of time for even casual gamers to amass their fair share of rare stuff (greensteel weapons/items, tomes, maybe even a Chattering Ring). A respec that eliminates loot will hurt them more than the people that have 4+ capped toons knocking out a shroud in 45 minutes on each one of them when the timer's up.


What does that person do after that toon is perfect? What keeps them playing?

God forbid Turbine be required to motivate continued gameplay with content instead of incremental changes that frequently result in a sub-optimal character or a reroll.


Do you roll another toon? Isn't that the same as re-rolling?
Not necessarily. If you roll the same thing, slightly modified, you could view it as a re-roll. Or you could try something else. When I capped my ranger I rolled a monk. I've only capped three classes; were I able to ever "perfect" one of them, I'd still have plenty more to do.


We need motavation to keep playing and striving to make the perfect toon is it.
How about having fun? That's my motivation. I certainly enjoy getting new shinies for my characters, but using them is much more fun than obtaining them.

rimble
03-11-2009, 12:40 PM
My point is... IF they did something around this Repec idea... There should be a penalty. I'm sorry Bor, I just don't think there's been HUGE game changing nerfs to any class..... Maybe a littel nerf here and there, but no disasters really. Part of this game is that you have to earn things, it takes work to improve your toons, and it should continue that way.

You're right...there haven't been alot of nerfs...instead, there's actually very compelling new content that multi-class builds suddenly find themselves locked out of. It's not that their characters have suddenly become useless, but now suddenly they're not the character they wanted. "I want to make the best TWFer", and you do, and suddenly the game changes, and you're third-rate now. Not useless, but not what you wanted either, through no fault of your own. There's no reason to punish someone over that.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 12:42 PM
It creates imbalance and an unfair advantage with other players.
Not sure of what you're implying here. Would you mind elaborating?

Are you referring to what you talk in the following paragraph or something else?

It is not too unreasonable to ask them to gain XP normally like anyone else in the same situation who did not respec at that level range. And it helps keeps balance and prevents any quick change over to a newer levels of a class on the fly.
While I see where you are getting at, there are a with that: the order at which you take levels matters (feats and skills). If one wants to multiclass in a new class at level 2, he has to be able to get that level at level 2. Any respec system need to acknowledge this reality.

Since it has the side-effect of increasing the activity at lower levels, I viewed as a trade off.

Maybe you've got a way around it, though?

I know, balance is not important to some people. It is to the Dev's and in order for them to even consider any offer like this, don't give them something filled with holes, exploits or bugs. Give them something that they might actually want to work with.
First, I want to make clear that I do (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=159126) care about balance.

However, the problem with imbalance is that it reduces options and that some characters are far better than others. A ranger/monk is not a problem because it is a strong build but because it is a better builds than the rest of builds.

How quick we can 'exploit the game' as you put it does not matter to them as it leads to no 'problem'.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 12:45 PM
Hmm, not sure about that. at all.....
Well, the developers have already stated (http://ddo.enterwiki.net/page/Respec) that the problem with respec was "memory". The game currently does not "remember" when some events happened.

I just don't think there's been HUGE game changing nerfs to any class...
The problem with that reasoning is that it's circular logic.

If there has been no huge nerfs, it's because we lack respec and that without respec it would drive too many players away.

Aganazer
03-11-2009, 12:46 PM
Good job Borror0! This is a well thought out way of handling it. It even sounds do-able from a coding standpoint. There may be a few details to be ironed out by the devs like... What happens to your XP total? Is it reset to zero and added to when you use your tokens? Do you lose your current progress that you made toward the next level before the respec?

The int tome is a bit of a thorn in the side of any respec solution. I don't think it would be completely unfair to remove all tomes. They were all consumed (not equiped) at some point after character creation and your character should be reset to the point it was at immediately after creation, before you ever had a chance to eat any tomes.

The CoX method of handing out respecs seemed very fair. Maybe too generous. There were group quest chains that could be completed to get one respec token (non-repeatable). In CoX you were able to get three respecs on the way to max level, not including respecs given out by game changes.

The only abuse I can think of is how quickly people would be able to add splashes to their build. With a respec token, adding a 2 level monk splash to your current build would take minutes. But I am still not convinced that being able to do this would be a bad thing. We have been given some great incentives to stay pure with mod 9.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 12:52 PM
The only abuse I can think of is how quickly people would be able to add splashes to their build. With a respec token, adding a 2 level monk splash to your current build would take minutes. But I am still not convinced that being able to do this would be a bad thing. We have been given some great incentives to stay pure with mod 9.
The one thing that has to be avoided is being able to respec for the content you run, at-will.

That is the reason enhancements and feats have a 3 days timer. Obviously, a 'full respec' should require a longer timer because it is a greater change and because it would be silly to render useless other respec mechanism. Having to get back XP, a timer counted in months and a fairly costed gp cost should take care of that.

Gunga
03-11-2009, 01:13 PM
If there has been no huge nerfs, it's because we lack respec and that without respec it would drive too many players away.

Aretha?

Vuedoo
03-11-2009, 01:19 PM
I Think all the questions or suggestions that came up in the replys where actually answered. just a bit of a rough read being a first draft as you where thinking it. I had a few questions myself but after reading it twice they where answered.

To add.... if and what Turbine Decides to do with the Respec Theory Will Not please everybody 100% and Some not at all. We will have to deal with it when and if it Happens

Be Careful What you Wish For.

I was Thinking B-day Cake for DDO's B-day and got Ham... go figure

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 01:45 PM
Not sure of what you're implying here. Would you mind elaborating?

Are you referring to what you talk in the following paragraph or something else?

While I see where you are getting at, there are a with that: the order at which you take levels matters (feats and skills). If one wants to multiclass in a new class at level 2, he has to be able to get that level at level 2. Any respec system need to acknowledge this reality.

Since it has the side-effect of increasing the activity at lower levels, I viewed as a trade off.

Maybe you've got a way around it, though?

First, I want to make clear that I do (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=159126) care about balance.

However, the problem with imbalance is that it reduces options and that some characters are far better than others. A ranger/monk is not a problem because it is a strong build but because it is a better builds than the rest of builds.

How quick we can 'exploit the game' as you put it does not matter to them as it leads to no 'problem'.

I do not think you understand what I am trying to get at. I do not think most would have issues with someone keeping the XP as is on class levels one has already gotten on their class. Yet if a person wants to slide off a few class levels from a splash build to either add on to the class they have or aquire a whole new set of class levels then either way that XP gotten for that set of class levels should be within the range of the highest base that is not changed out. Not letting them go back to get the XP at level 1-6(example) when the difference between the XP range for level 1-6 as opposed to level 14-20 is VASTLY different.

Respec a level 14 ftr/6 pally into 20 level fighter.. Your way lets them go back, releveling using the XP range of 1-6 for any new classes added. The difference in that 1-6 levels compared to XP from 15-20 is so great that it is absurb. That player will then be able to relevel in a new set of class levels within an hour as opposed to weeks or months that someone else at level 14 advancing to level 20 would be required to do without them respeccing.

It also destroys the balance of the XP system in another way. That is that we earn XP in a class which is considered "experience". You do not get to transfer that XP earned in one class to give to another class you might want instead. You want that XP in that new class? Earn it. That player wants to get those last 6 levels of fighter in a respec like that, earn it the right way. Not picking the very lowest XP range from the lower levels to simply "save them time". If everyone else in the same situation has to earn their XP, so should those who want to respec.

As far as players having characters better than others, nothing Turbine can add to the game will not make a person build a character better or on par with others on an equal footing. What balances it is experience in building and them researching things. Turbine should not dumb things down for everyone because some people simply suck at character creating.

And how can you sit there and say that how quickly we can exploit things does not matter to the Devs nor creates a problem for them? Of course it does. If it unbalanced or being exploited, they will fix the situation. We all know that.

rimble
03-11-2009, 01:54 PM
I do not think you understand what I am trying to get at. I do not think most would have issues with someone keeping the XP as is on class levels one has already gotten on their class.

What is this 'XP earned per class' idea? Such a notion doesn't exist anywhere. Your character has XP. That's it.

The only abuse here would be levelling up a traditionally normal/strong character and then respeccing him into something that would have been weak and useless at lower levels had you actually played through them...and again, so what? We do that in PnP all the time. Your 12th level character dies and you make a new one and can make whatever you wanted without having to worry about slugging through some low-level doldrums. That's D&D man.

smatt
03-11-2009, 01:59 PM
Well, the developers have already stated (http://ddo.enterwiki.net/page/Respec) that the problem with respec was "memory". The game currently does not "remember" when some events happened.

Hmm, well within what I proposed, there's nothing for the game to remember:

1. Respec Race = Lose all bound items All bound items have an identifying signafying that they're bound, correct. A simple if.....

2. Respec Classes = Stays at current level but must reaquire XP back to current XP before leveling any higher. All XP is simply earsed, the only possible tough part here is that the game has to recognize you at a particualr level without the XP. Not that difficult to code, I think....

3. Respec Stats = Lose all consumed Tomes bound and unbound Doesn't matter whn you ate the tomes, the game simply removes all Inherent bonuses to stats. Again, another very easy thing to do . The only sticky part would be skill points, and that could simply be overcome by the game ignoring stat point accumulation as related to intellegence up to the marked point. Then when you go up in level it would simply use the NEW for allocation.

4. Respec skills = No loss Ummmmmmm, nothing here to talk about really.




The problem with that reasoning is that it's circular logic.


If there has been no huge nerfs, it's because we lack respec and that without respec it would drive too many players away.

Huh, circular logic? So you're saying that toons would only be nerfed because they haven't implemented a more encompassing respec over and above Sorcs changing spells, all tooons being able to change feats, and complete re-allocation of action points (Which I think is plenty of respec already). Bor, you're speaking in tongues here... That makes no sense what so ever.....

Borror0
03-11-2009, 02:00 PM
It also destroys the balance of the XP system in another way. That is that we earn XP in a class which is considered "experience".
Experience is per character and not per class.

If it unbalanced or being exploited, they will fix the situation. We all know that.
True, but how does the speed at which the problem arise affects the problem?

Imbalance is a problem the day it appears. Period. The problem with imbalance is how it affects character creation by narrowing the options. A respec does not make it worse, no matter how fast we can respec... no matter how short the timer is.

rimble
03-11-2009, 02:03 PM
Huh, circular logic? So you're saying that toons would only be nerfed because they haven't implemented a more encompassing respec over and above Sorcs changing spells, all tooons being able to change feats, and complete re-allocation of action points (Which I think is plenty of respec already). Bor, you're speaking in tongues here... That makes no sense what so ever.....

You mentioned there haven't been many nerfs, so we don't need respecs.

However, there could be nerfs if they had a reasonable respec system in place, because then you can recover from the nerf.

Your circular logic is that there haven't been nerfs, so we don't need respecs; but they don't do nerfs, because they don't have a good respec.

smatt
03-11-2009, 02:04 PM
You're right...there haven't been alot of nerfs...instead, there's actually very compelling new content that multi-class builds suddenly find themselves locked out of. It's not that their characters have suddenly become useless, but now suddenly they're not the character they wanted. "I want to make the best TWFer", and you do, and suddenly the game changes, and you're third-rate now. Not useless, but not what you wanted either, through no fault of your own. There's no reason to punish someone over that.

Well new mods are new adventures, how could we possibly know what we haven't seen yet? So because players have pigeon holed their toons into one function, instead of looking at a bigger picture, they should just give them a pass,let them aquire goods with one ideal build, then when it beomces less than ideal, they can change it so they can again be ideal to aquire more stuff. WOW just wow..... That's not the game I signed up for and love... It's a game for 10 year olds....... You know "Mommy, it's not fair, there's this new snot monster I can't insta-kill, it's not fair"

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 02:05 PM
What is this 'XP earned per class' idea? Such a notion doesn't exist anywhere. Your character has XP. That's it.

The only abuse here would be levelling up a traditionally normal/strong character and then respeccing him into something that would have been weak and useless at lower levels had you actually played through them...and again, so what? We do that in PnP all the time. Your 12th level character dies and you make a new one and can make whatever you wanted without having to worry about slugging through some low-level doldrums. That's D&D man.

Obviously you have never played D&D before. You do not get to transfer XP earned on one class and trade that XP for another class. If you want to get XP for a new class, you go out and earn that XP.

A player at level a level 10 fighter can not slide off one level and transfer it out for a level of cleric. You are allowed by a DM to take that one level off then earn that XP back up to level 10 in your new additional class.

You do that in P&P...all the time? Then you do not have a very good GM that allows that to take place ALL the time. Where is the balance in that? None. Your character dies and you make a new one, with the DM's help and not as "whatever you want" without worry. It is not a free for all like you make it come out as. There are limits.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 02:07 PM
Hmm, well within what I proposed, there's nothing for the game to remember:
Of course there is.

Respec Classes
Which level did you take at level 1? That affects your skill points. There are also problem with feats and stuff like that.

The game does not remember the order a lot of things happened.

4. Respec skills = No loss Ummmmmmm, nothing here to talk about really.

See above.

Huh, circular logic? [...] That makes no sense what so ever.....
Think of monk AC and what they would have to do to solve it. You'll see it'll make sense.

Try to figure why STWF was never added in the end.

smatt
03-11-2009, 02:08 PM
You mentioned there haven't been many nerfs, so we don't need respecs.

However, there could be nerfs if they had a reasonable respec system in place, because then you can recover from the nerf.

Your circular logic is that there haven't been nerfs, so we don't need respecs; but they don't do nerfs, because they don't have a good respec.


No resaon for either, and even if there was a respec why would that create the reasoning for nerfs...... Oh because everybody wants an easy button to solve the inherent, short sighted weaknesses they built into their toons. I see no real reason for a respec other this player retention idea, which I doubt would cause any truly meaningful, cost effective, change in the subscriber base. Well there is the greed factor, the easy button, I want a simple game factor, and the plain lazy factor... So maybe there are some other reasons:D

rimble
03-11-2009, 02:11 PM
Obviously you have never played D&D before. You do not get to transfer XP earned on one class and trade that XP for another class. If you want to get XP for a new class, you go out and earn that XP.

A player at level a level 10 fighter can not slide off one level and transfer it out for a level of cleric. You are allowed by a DM to take that one level off then earn that XP back up to level 10 in your new additional class.

You do that in P&P...all the time? Then you do not have a very good GM that allows that to take place ALL the time. Where is the balance in that? None. Your character dies and you make a new one, with the DM's help and not as "whatever you want" without worry. It is not a free for all like you make it come out as. There are limits.

Please stick to facts and sharing your opinions, and leave out the baseless accusations. I play D&D alot, and I am the DM.

The game is about fun. You bet your ass I'd let a character swap something out in a heartbeat if it will make things better/more fun, and I have. Don't think I've done a straight level swap out...but Feats, Spells, sure, if it's justified. At the same time, I've made people stick with bad choices they've made too. It's not a respec free-for-all. Though as I mentioned there is sort of the 'creating a character at level 10+ and skipping the gimpy levels' factor sometimes. However, why do people want to turn these games into some sort of masochistic badge of honor?

It's about fun. My character/build/whatever is no longer fun because of changes in the game. Please make it fun again. That's it. That's the bottom line. No suffering. No separating the boys from the men. No moral superiority. Just fun.

I am not specifically arguing for Borror0's method of respec. I am arguing for some form of respec. Maybe you can't change your class levels in the final solution, but agreeing that a respec would be good for the game is the first step.

It has been good for every other game I've seen it. It would be good for this game as well.

smatt
03-11-2009, 02:13 PM
Of course there is.

Which level did you take at level 1? That affects your skill points. There are also problem with feats and stuff like that.

The game does not remember the order a lot of things happened.

See above.

Think of monk AC and what they would have to do to solve it. You'll see it'll make sense.

Try to figure why STWF was never added in the end.


OK got ya.... Yep Respec would be a huge waste of DEV time.... Of course the Pro people could each send a check to Turbine for what U$1,000 or somthing.... The they could do it no problem :D Soory just being a smart ass.

The onyl way I would ever be FOR all of this, would be if there were some pretty painful consequinces..... It can't just be a Mullighan..... There has to be some finality in the game.. Otherwise it loses it's flavor..... It loses the fact that to be able to accomplish some things you have to be able to do some things.... You will end up getting people buildign one way for a while then chaning for a while, then changing again.... Making the whole progression of a toon the easy way.....

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 02:17 PM
Experience is per character and not per class.

True, but how does the speed at which the problem arise affects the problem?

Imbalance is a problem the day it appears. Period. The problem with imbalance is how it affects character creation by narrowing the options. A respec does not make it worse, no matter how fast we can respec... no matter how short the timer is.

And you claim to care about balance yet write that above? When inbalance is glaringly obvious but its ok, we can just deal with it after the fact. No so honest about caring for balance are we? You have since day one been stuck on what is balancing for players, what is good for the players, what options should be give to the players AND leaving out the Dev's ideas, concerns, wants and needs are. That is why you will fail with any idea you all put forth.

Stop trying to sell this idea like some used car salesmen, promising every sweet deal you can dream up to convince the players to come along with this idea. Instead, the people who you should be selling it to you are ignoring. The Dev's. You can sugar-coat this idea to the players all you want to get them to come rushing to it. But the Dev's are not so easily fooled. They are the ones who have to work with the idea to impliment it and sugar-coating to them will not work. They kind of have to look at all the details of it, instead of sweeping the details under the rug when being sold to the players. That is why you will fail with any idea you put forth like this.


It is NOT just about the speed of it. It IS grossly unfair for one group to pick what XP level range they want for leveling some levels when everyone else has to earn the same levels at a much higher XP cost with them playing as normal. Why should someone respecced be given a different XP table than everyone else? Or is it showing that you really do NOT care about balance nor what is fair to everyone else? I kind of thought so.

rimble
03-11-2009, 02:18 PM
The onyl way I would ever be FOR all of this, would be if there were some pretty painful consequinces..... It can't just be a Mullighan..... There has to be some finality in the game.. Otherwise it loses it's flavor..... It loses the fact that to be able to accomplish some things you have to be able to do some things.... You will end up getting people buildign one way for a while then chaning for a while, then changing again.... Making the whole progression of a toon the easy way.....

Or...y'know...making the game fun at all levels instead of slogging through various spots of dead levels depending on build.

Aganazer
03-11-2009, 02:22 PM
I do not think you understand what I am trying to get at. I do not think most would have issues with someone keeping the XP as is on class levels one has already gotten on their class. Yet if a person wants to slide off a few class levels from a splash build to either add on to the class they have or aquire a whole new set of class levels then either way that XP gotten for that set of class levels should be within the range of the highest base that is not changed out. Not letting them go back to get the XP at level 1-6(example) when the difference between the XP range for level 1-6 as opposed to level 14-20 is VASTLY different.

Respec a level 14 ftr/6 pally into 20 level fighter.. Your way lets them go back, releveling using the XP range of 1-6 for any new classes added. The difference in that 1-6 levels compared to XP from 15-20 is so great that it is absurb. That player will then be able to relevel in a new set of class levels within an hour as opposed to weeks or months that someone else at level 14 advancing to level 20 would be required to do without them respeccing.

IMO what you're saying describes the biggest weakness of Borror0 scheme. I could live with it though. It doesn't let you gain levels that you didn't already rightfully earn. It would be pitifully easy for that 14 ftr/6 pally to respec into a 20 ftr, but they would still have done significantly more work than they would have with no respec option. The biggest side effect is that they are now happy with their character.

What if the system didn't let you earn any XP from any source while you had Training Tokens in your inventory? You have to use your tokens, trash the ones you no longer want, then go earn some new levels to replace the ones you lost. I still like Borror0's easy splash method better, but it might be a worthy compromise.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 02:26 PM
And you claim to care about balance yet write that above?
Explain why you think an imbalance is bad. Explain to me how imbalance is bad for the game.

I have my views on that but you have not stated yours yet. Instead of acting like if I'm an imbecile, try to educate me.

Why should someone respecced be given a different XP table than everyone else?
Oh, that would be an horrible thing. Thankfully, they are using the same XP chart (http://ddo.enterwiki.net/page/XP#Experience_Points_to_Level) as everyone.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 02:28 PM
Or...y'know...making the game fun at all levels instead of slogging through various spots of dead levels depending on build.

Cool. Maybe someday the Dev's can install a "Click here to be level 20" button in the character creation screen for some to avoid having to ya know....level up a character. Let me know how that works out.

rimble
03-11-2009, 02:29 PM
Cool. Maybe someday the Dev's can install a "Click here to be level 20" button in the character creation screen for some to avoid having to ya know....level up a character. Let me know how that works out.

The character was already leveled up. Why do you want to make them do it again? Holy cow, what a leap (http://www.thinkgeek.com/books/humor/8e6c/images/2070/).

Borror0
03-11-2009, 02:29 PM
You have to use your tokens, trash the ones you no longer want, then go earn some new levels to replace the ones you lost.
Not a workable solution since the order in which you take your levels matters.

Gunga
03-11-2009, 02:31 PM
ANSWER ME!

Where is the public consequence? Give me SOMETHING, and I'll join your crusade.


No left shoe ever again.
Pink X on forehead
Has to skip through public areas.
Dunce Cap perma /showhelmet on
Or anything else that identifies the re-re. C'mon man. Work it in.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 02:32 PM
Explain why you think an imbalance is bad. Explain to me how imbalance is bad for the game.

I have my views on that but you have not stated yours yet. Instead of acting like if I'm an imbecile, try to educate me.

Oh, that would be an horrible thing. Thankfully, they are using the same XP chart (http://ddo.enterwiki.net/page/XP#Experience_Points_to_Level) as everyone.



The fact that you are pretending you do not know how imbalance is bad for a game is not all that suprising for someone who claims to "care about balance". Why do I need to educate someone about game balance for someone that claims that they care about balance?


Really? The same XP table?

A person leveling from 1-6 needs 200,000 XP compared to a person gaining levels of 14-20needs 1,360,000++ XP. Yeah, I can see what you are saying. Its balanced and equal? I thought so.

rimble
03-11-2009, 02:33 PM
ANSWER ME!

Where is the public consequence? Give me SOMETHING, and I'll join your crusade.

Uhm...eternal dirt cloud (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig-Pen) around the character so everyone knows you're a dirty-dirty person who likes having fun?

Borror0
03-11-2009, 02:35 PM
The fact that you are pretending you do not know how imbalance is bad for a game is not all that suprising for someone who claims to "care about balance". Why do I need to educate someone about game balance for someone that claims that they care about balance?
You are claiming that it is bad. I'm telling you to back your claim.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 02:36 PM
ANSWER ME!

Where is the public consequence? Give me SOMETHING, and I'll join your crusade.
All of Mhykke's toons suffer all of the consequences you listed. We got a deal?

Timjc86
03-11-2009, 02:38 PM
The fact that you are pretending you do not know how imbalance is bad for a game is not all that suprising for someone who claims to "care about balance". Why do I need to educate someone about game balance for someone that claims that they care about balance?


I have my views on that but you have not stated yours yet.
(Emphasis mine.)

I think he wants to know why you think imbalance is bad.

smatt
03-11-2009, 02:39 PM
Or...y'know...making the game fun at all levels instead of slogging through various spots of dead levels depending on build.


Hmm, well my idea of fun is EARNING what I get, not through an easy button to everything.... I still think a Respec as Bor is talking about is an easy button to a game that for many is easy anyway, but for others is at least challenging for a while.... So through this, it would make easy to the point of complete boredom, and for some it would just make it easier.


OK, how about this... One time and one time only repsec for each toon.... Cost $25 in real money. That way after a thousand or some people do it.... Turbine breaks even... Then any surplus could go to purchasing intoxicants for the forum team for all the **** they have to read through :D

There needs ot a significant penalty of somekind built in..... But if the same 10 people keep screaming maybe, jsut maybe Turbine will cave into them.....

Aganazer
03-11-2009, 02:39 PM
Not a workable solution since the order in which you take your levels matters.

Good because your original method also forces people to revisit mid to low level content more often than they might otherwise do. Its always nice for a newer player like me to see some old timers around my level.

It may also allow players, in an indirect way, de-level themselves to play with lower level friends. Even if all my characters were 'perfect' I might be willing to respec once just to spend time with a returning or new friend that is at a different level.

Two birds, one stone.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 02:40 PM
You are claiming that it is bad. I'm telling you to back your claim.

So basically you are admitting to just giving us lip service in claiming you care about balancing with asking us to back up why balance is bad for the game. And you wonder why people do not take you seriously?

Gunga
03-11-2009, 02:41 PM
All of Mhykke's toons suffer all of the consequences you listed. We got a deal?

Cute, but I need to see it in the OP. Work it out, and get it in.

We need some public consequence, and then I can get behind it. If you're gonna give the easy button to some casual n00bs, give the guys who worked it out something to gloat over.

Get to work.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 02:44 PM
So basically you are admitting to just giving us lip service in claiming you care about balancing with asking us to back up why balance is bad for the game.
No, actually, I already explained why balance is evil months ago and linked it do you (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=159126) (twice now).

Your turn.

Dexxaan
03-11-2009, 02:45 PM
answer Me!

Where Is The Public Consequence? Give Me Something, And I'll Join Your Crusade.


no Left Shoe Ever Again.
pink x On Forehead
has To Skip Through Public Areas.
dunce Cap Perma /showhelmet On
or Anything Else That Identifies The Re-re. C'mon Man. Work It In.


Roflmmfao!

rimble
03-11-2009, 02:47 PM
Hmm, well my idea of fun is EARNING what I get, not through an easy button to everything....

They still had to level up the character. There still hasn't been a good reason why people should suffer to be able to tweak their characters back into alignment a little. I really don't understand any of this 'giving away' and 'earning' talk...no one is asking for an 'easy button' here, or asking for a free level-up to 20. It's just crazy nonsensical 12 capped characters machismo grunting.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 02:48 PM
No, actually, I already explained why balance is evil months ago and linked it do you (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=159126) (twice now).

Your turn.

If you already "explained" then why do you need to ask: "Explain why you think an imbalance is bad. Explain to me how imbalance is bad for the game."

If I say it will be imbalancing then you turn around and ask how imbalance is bad. How honest is that really? If you already know then you do not need to ask why it is so. Now you are claiming balance is....evil? So the claims of caring about balance is even more untrue because you think its "evil". Balance is evil but you care about balance?....lovely man, lovely.

Aganazer
03-11-2009, 02:49 PM
ANSWER ME!

Where is the public consequence? Give me SOMETHING, and I'll join your crusade.


No left shoe ever again.
Pink X on forehead
Has to skip through public areas.
Dunce Cap perma /showhelmet on
Or anything else that identifies the re-re. C'mon man. Work it in.

I think it would be great to have different colored player names. Not necessarily for this feature since I think you're being a little vain here, but to use it for a perma-death option selected at character creation. Give all perma-death characters a red name.

Any form of public ridicule for a respec would defeat any incentive Turbine might have for doing it. It wouldn't bring players back if it all it did was make them feel like a dunce.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 02:52 PM
If you already know then you do not need to ask why it is so.
I did not say that I know why I said I had my views as to why imbalance was bad for the game.

However, my views do not support your claims so your views must differ, and thus the need to explain.

LeslieWest_GuitarGod
03-11-2009, 02:55 PM
/not signed

What comprimise?

This is still all about the loot. Iit is not about some build mistake it is about loot. If your toon had zero loot you would re-roll them in a second if you found a flaw you didnt like. But because you have X number of pieces of raid loot you wont do it. I am in favor of this if ALL loot is destroyed at respec. The problem is nobody else would be in favor of this becasue this is still all about the loot. I am not in favor of this if you received zero respec tokens and had to grind XP back to level cap 100%. XP is not a limiting factor. Plat is not a limiting factor. If this is for the casual gamer who plays 5 hours a week, they don't have the stacks of uber loot anyway, so a respec that eliminates loot won't hurt them.

Someone stated in a previous thread that they are in favor of a respec becasue they only have one toon they play. They have finally gotten every piece of loot they want but they made some poor decisions while creating the toon so it is not perfect. They wish that that toon was perfect and want to have a re-roll to do so. What does that person do after that toon is perfect? What keeps them playing? There is no point to running that perfect toon any longer. Do you roll another toon? Isn't that the same as re-rolling? We need motavation to keep playing and striving to make the perfect toon is it. Eliminating that journey towards the perfect toon eliminates the need to play at all.

I will not agree to a respec that allows a faster method to the perfect toon with all the perfect gear to go with it. Is there a game out there that takes less time to get to cap?

/signed 1,000,000%.

Sorry Borro, as you know I'd like to see an upgrade to the re-training method used in Eberron proper. Id like to see it include skills as well. This will help out newer players fine tune as well as some veterans that wish to teach his/her toon new skills (for example, more umd sound nice?).. Your ideas, which obviously are showing some flexibility, still feed only to the pro-TOTALrespec audience. If all your stats go... all your LOOT must go. Simple as that.

Dexxaan
03-11-2009, 02:56 PM
They still had to level up the character. There still hasn't been a good reason why people should suffer to be able to tweak their characters back into alignment a little. I really don't understand any of this 'giving away' and 'earning' talk...no one is asking for an 'easy button' here, or asking for a free level-up to 20.

Theres a thing called learn from experience and don't be foolish thru 15 levels to figure out by 16th tht you made a mistake in a GAME with information, Forums, D&D Experience, etc....

No excuse for poor planning. Suck it up, reroll....hell nowadays you can farm anything in the game. Old school were the days when random drops nd token based Raid Shortmanning was the best way, it demanded performance, solid builds and such.

Now you can pug your way past your 100th Reaver (5 opportunities for +3 Tomes to drop); Shroud your heart out and make GS items and weapons (that in many cases overshadow most raid loot), Titan is a 25 minute reaver Raid, DQ is obsolete, Dragon is all but obsolete as well, The only real Challenges are in your Luck vs Dragon ****ed Lottery Armor.

So stop the whining, grind, pay while you do, be happy. The ONLY respec's that make any sense IMO are Skills (think of it as going to relearn your career Skills or an MBA) and Alignment (and even alignment is a big oops I should have read the Frickin Manual IMO)

ghale
03-11-2009, 02:58 PM
Cute, but I need to see it in the OP. Work it out, and get it in.

We need some public consequence, and then I can get behind it. If you're gonna give the easy button to some casual n00bs, give the guys who worked it out something to gloat over.

Get to work.

Why have the devs waste time coding something like that? Just wear your "I'm better than everyone" hat or t-shirt and call it a day :).

Gunga
03-11-2009, 02:59 PM
Why have the devs waste time coding something like that? Just wear your "I'm better than everyone" hat or t-shirt and call it a day :).

It's written on the crotch of all my boxers.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 03:00 PM
I did not say that I know why I said I had my views as to why imbalance was bad for the game.

However, my views do not support your claims so your views must differ, and thus the need to explain.

You are doing what politicians do, speaking out of both sides of your mouth. You tell people you care about balance then remark how you think balance is "evil". Both claims invalidates the other.

I said it will be imbalancing and explained how it would be. You did not like my answer and instead of refutting why I thought it was imbalancing you make it about why I think imbalancing in general is bad. You wanting to talk about my veiws of why balance is a bad thing is a completly separate side topic being brought up to side track the discussion, as normal. If you do not like the answer I originally give you, just say so instead all of this BS.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 03:02 PM
I said it will be imbalancing and explained how it would be.
Care to quote me where you did?

EazyWeazy
03-11-2009, 03:05 PM
You are doing what politicians do, speaking out of both sides of your mouth. You tell people you care about balance then remark how you think balance is "evil". Both claims invalidates the other.

I said it will be imbalancing and explained how it would be. You did not like my answer and instead of refutting why I thought it was imbalancing you make it about why I think imbalancing in general is bad. You wanting to talk about my veiws of why balance is a bad thing is a completly separate side topic being brought up to side track the discussion, as normal. If you do not like the answer I originally give you, just say so instead all of this BS.

Sorry, but you didn't EXPLAIN anything. You stated something, but there was no EXPLANATION.

We know WHY Bor thinks what he does because he's posted it. We don't know WHY you think what you do because you have not posted it.

Lay out the argument so that others can better understand what you think and you may even convince some people to change their minds and think the same thing.

rimble
03-11-2009, 03:06 PM
So stop the whining, grind, pay while you do, be happy. The ONLY respec's that make any sense IMO are Skills (think of it as going to relearn your career Skills or an MBA) and Alignment (and even alignment is a big oops I should have read the Frickin Manual IMO)

Ok...so we have Feats, we have Enhancements, you'd like Skills and Alignment...what's left...Classes and Ability Scores? That's fine, that's a start. You agree that some sort of better respec mechanism would improve the game. I agree, though your statements are a little contradictory. "Suck it up and reroll" versus being okay with a nearly full respec (excepting class, race, and ability scores). I will freely admit that I (maybe unfairly) place less weight on "suck it up and reroll" comments from people with many capped characters. I'm trying to think more about others that can't really cap a character in two weeks.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 03:12 PM
Sorry, but you didn't EXPLAIN anything. You stated something, but there was no EXPLANATION.

We know WHY Bor thinks what he does because he's posted it. We don't know WHY you think what you do because you have not posted it.

Lay out the argument so that others can better understand what you think and you may even convince some people to change their minds and think the same thing.

It helps when making such a claim to have the ability to delete all the things I wrote that make your assurtion of me not explaining them true. Since my words are clear and were explained multiple times, saying I gave no explanation on why I thought it was imbalance is untrue.

You do not know why I think imbalance is a bad thing because that was not the topic. It became the topic because of BorroO dancing around the issue like always. I do not need to lay out the arguement for something that was not the arguement. He does not like people's answer so changes the topic into something else similar to what is being talked about so he can dismantle an arguement that never was. There is a word for that but I will refrain from saying the word.

EazyWeazy
03-11-2009, 03:16 PM
It helps when making such a claim to have the ability to delete all the things I wrote that make your assurtion of me not explaining them true. Since my words are clear and were explained multiple times, saying I gave no explanation on why I thought it was imbalance is untrue.

You do not know why I think imbalance is a bad thing because that was not the topic. It became the topic because of BorroO dancing around the issue like always. I do not need to lay out the arguement for something that was not the arguement. He does not like people's answer so changes the topic into something else similar to what is being talked about so he can dismantle an arguement that never was. There is a word for that but I will refrain from saying the word.

I guess that's one way to look at it. :rolleyes:

Borror0
03-11-2009, 03:29 PM
You do not know why I think imbalance is a bad thing because that was not the topic.
Let's look at that shall we?

You started the topic by saying:

I know, balance is not important to some people. It is to the Dev's and in order for them to even consider any offer like this, don't give them something filled with holes, exploits or bugs. Give them something that they might actually want to work with.
To which I reply:

However, the problem with imbalance is that it reduces options and that some characters are far better than others. A ranger/monk is not a problem because it is a strong build but because it is a better builds than the rest of builds.

How quick we can 'exploit the game' as you put it does not matter to them as it leads to no 'problem'.
To which you replied:

And how can you sit there and say that how quickly we can exploit things does not matter to the Devs nor creates a problem for them? Of course it does. If it unbalanced or being exploited, they will fix the situation. We all know that.
Then, I asked:

True, but how does the speed at which the problem arise affects the problem?

Imbalance is a problem the day it appears. Period. The problem with imbalance is how it affects character creation by narrowing the options. A respec does not make it worse, no matter how fast we can respec... no matter how short the timer is.
And since then you have been avoiding to answer.

Your claim was that the timer was too short. Since it was too short, players can use the respec more often to 'exploit' the game and that is bad as it "speeds up the imbalance". Since that, in my view, imbalance is a problem seen at the creation screen I don't see how more stronger builds is a problem.

However, you do, and that is why I asked you to define imbalance.

You have yet to do it, several posts later.

rimble
03-11-2009, 03:36 PM
Your claim was that the timer was too short. Since it was too short, players can use the respec more often to 'exploit' the game and that is bad as it "speeds up the imbalance". Since that, in my view, imbalance is a problem seen at the creation screen I don't see how more or less overpowered builds is a problem.

I see it like this (probably horribly wrong, I'm getting lost...):

Borror0:
If everyone chose to play the same few builds, the problem is with the game system that is making those builds so much more desireable than any others. Fix the game system.

Quanefel:
Yes, but if a frequent respec system is available, they can constantly choose to respec to the latest uber build, and everyone will always exploit the latest uber build.

Borror0:
Which isn't a problem with the respec system, it's with the game system that makes the uber build so uber. Fix the game system.

rimble:
So what about uber builds? Even if everyone DOES respec to the latest uber build, they're likely doing so because it's a better/more fun build. Fun is the bottom line here, though I'd prefer to see many builds that are viable/fun. Respec to uber build to have fun in the short term, but ultimately, fix the game system.

Gunga
03-11-2009, 03:38 PM
I see it like this (probably horribly wrong, I'm getting lost...):

Borror0:
If everyone chose to play the same few builds, the problem is with the game system that is making those builds so much more desireable than any others. Fix the game system.

Quanefel:
Yes, but if a frequent respec system is available, they can constantly choose to respec to the latest uber build, and everyone will always exploit the latest uber build.

Borror0:
Which isn't a problem with the respec system, it's with the game system that makes the uber build so uber. Fix the game system.

rimble:
So what? Even if everyone DOES respec to the latest uber build, they're likely doing so because it's a better/more fun build. Fun is the bottom line here, though I'd prefer to see many builds that are viable/fun. Respec to uber build to have fun in the short term, but ultimately, fix the game system.

Headsmack? Anyone?

rimble
03-11-2009, 03:39 PM
Headsmack? Anyone?

Sure, here you go...*SMACK*

Borror0
03-11-2009, 03:43 PM
Quanefel:
Yes, but if a frequent respec system is available, they can constantly choose to respec to the latest uber build, and everyone will always exploit the latest uber build.
That does not seem to be what he said (and if it was you've got my reply to it correctly).

What he seem to be trying to say (from my understanding) is that by having a small timer, players can play more powerful builds and that, itself, is a bad thing. It's as if the quantity of unbalancing builds was problematic in any sort of way.

If that is indeed what he is saying, he needs to justify why the quantity if a problem.

Hafeal
03-11-2009, 03:43 PM
They do know if you read a tome and it's plus... they just don't track when...

So if you've used a +2 tome at anytime on your level 16 character, the idea is to just give it to you at level 1.

I did not realize they "know" your character ate a tome. I cannot recall but what is the tome increase named in the ability after you eat it? Is this what you are referencing?

Borror0, not having INT tomes retro (as with other abilties) has solely to do with giving characters higher base scores for skills which you would otherwise not be able to reach. Is this horrendous in terms of game balance? I would agree with you and probably say no - unless the dev have skill issues for future modules of which we remain unaware.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 03:45 PM
Let's look at that shall we?

You started the topic by saying:

To which I reply:

To which you replied:

Then, I asked:

And since then you have been avoiding to answer.

Your claim was that the timer was too short. Since it was too short, players can use the respec more often to 'exploit' the game and that is bad as it "speeds up the imbalance". Since that, in my view, imbalance is a problem seen at the creation screen I don't see how more stronger builds is a problem.

However, you do, and that is why I asked you to define imbalance.

You have yet to do it, several posts later.



I am not avoiding an answer that was not the discussion. You very well know that. Instead of accepting that you were wrong you splice random quotes and attempt to reconnect them in a revisionist way. Won't work on me.

From it being a matter of the part of the idea being imbalancing to you reworking it into what MY definition of how imbalancing is bad for the game. I mean really, you are going to take that big of a leap like that? If you did not want people to critizise your idea, maybe you should have not wrote it in the forums.

Back on topic. If the timer is too short, if I see it as imbalancing then I gave my reasons. Maybe work on adjusting the timer instead of waving my suggestions away with your hand because you do not like it. Address the issue instead of getting overly defensive of your idea. And no, I am not going to give my definition on why I think imbalance is bad for the game for this too. Its getting absurd. My idea of why means nothing when its Turbines idea of why it is bad that is EVERYTHING. My idea of why, your idea of why means jack.

shores11
03-11-2009, 03:47 PM
Well, with all the arguing back and forth, I figured I could try to post a proposal and see how both sides would agree with it.

Oh, and sorry to start another thread...

Goals:

Allowing players to adapt to game change.
Being affordable for everyone, casual and hardcore alike.
Trying to address (or reduce) some of the anti-respec fears.
Avoiding hundreds of nearly uncodable restrictions.

Basic idea:
When a character has to respec, he talks to an NPC (I'll leave the aspect lore out for now) that pops out the equivalent of the character creation screen. The players rebuilds the character as he would wants it to be (he can only use, as starting class, a class he had levels of previously however). Once the player is done, he confirms his choice and his character is transformed back to a level 1 character of the class he picked.

The NPC also gives him 'class level token' for each class levels he had. For an example, a level 16 fighter will be given 15 'fighter class tokens'. For a 14 wizard/2 rogue that picked rogue as starting class, he will receive 14 'wizard class tokens' and 1 'rogue class token'. (This could be changed into a percentage of tokens if necessary.)

The character can then use them by talking to a training to level back up. So, a level 16 fighter only wanting to respec his skill points or ability scores just has to respec the way he was all the way to level 16 by talking to the fighter trainer (each time you talk to the trainer a token is consumed). Since each token is class specific, the character is limited to respec back into the class he had. If he wants to change some of his class levels, he will have to gain those levels by collecting XP.

Favor, tomes and equipment are kept.

In order to avoid the respec mechanism to be used as a quick way to skip a few levels, the token would have a Maximum Level at which they could be used and would be destroyed if the character still has some upon reaching that level (for example, if a 16 fighter respec into 14ftr/2pal, then his two remaining fighter token will be destroyed upon reaching level 16.

Since this means we will rerun quests more often, it would be nice if the 'You have run this quest too many times' message would slowly decay over time. This would avoid running into a scenario were all the low level quests would have been ran to death in a few years (ie it's not a priority but it will have to be done at one point in time0.

Timer:
I like either of those two proposals:

Fixed one to two month timer
Smaller timer, at first, but goes up with frequency use (and slowly reduces if not used)
I'd like to mention, though, that in both cases the timer would only start when the last class level token is used or destroyed. All the time that may lapse between the two will count as an 'additional timer', punishing those who are trying to regain more levels in a new class more than others.

Cost:
I will not list any distribution of cost, here, but I'll at least explain what I think should be done. Since this is an ability some lower level characters may be interested in using, a scaling cost would make sense - like Turbine did with Dragonshard. After all, the cost of rerolling gets higher the higher level we are and DDO needs more moneysinks.

The cost should be high but not out of reach for casual gamers to be able to afford it.

Advantages:

Does not seem impossible to code.
Can easily be used to adapt game changes.
Increases the quantity of players at lower levels.*
Reduces the cheesiness by making it a pain to change class drastically.
Mimics more closely (although not perfectly) the tested models found in other MMOs.

*Since there is no restriction as to what levels one has to use his tokens, most players will retrain their new class levels at lower levels.

Disadvantages:

Does not totally prevent drastic class changes.
Reduces some of the game's grind.

Final words:
This, to me, sounds like a nice compromise between the two sides. Of course, I am biased so I am interested by the input of the those sides. However, the question I ask is not 'Should there be a respec?' but rather 'If Turbine was to implement a respec, would this be something you would oppose? If so, what would you want them to change and why?' since all the first question can lead to is a pointless debate on cost vs benefits, when none of us knows the cost.

Hopefully, we can stay civil and try to come to a proposal both sides can agree with by listening to the problems we see in this proposal and trying to fix them.

PS: Again, really sorry to start another thread but otherwise this would have been lost in the pro vs anti arguments.

My one question is, who are you compromising with? If it is other players then why? It seems to me that you need to convince not only the developers but the games producer as well.

I am personally against the respec idea and proposals. This game is about questing and should always be so. There is nothing wrong with the lower level quests when you run them at your level in fact many of them are better than the higher level quests. If you say that you do not want to run the same quests again and again to get to the capped level then you are a little disingenuous as when you reach your capp you run those quests over and over.

rimble
03-11-2009, 03:49 PM
Back on topic. If the timer is too short, if I see it as imbalancing then I gave my reasons. Maybe work on adjusting the timer instead of waving my suggestions away with your hand because you do not like it. Address the issue instead of getting overly defensive of your idea. And no, I am not going to give my definition on why I think imbalance is bad for the game for this too. Its getting absurd. My idea of why means nothing when its Turbines idea of why it is bad that is EVERYTHING. My idea of why, your idea of why means jack.

But...it's okay to talk about it. If you don't want to that's fine, but to make assertions without explanations isn't fair to the discussion. Just means we should all skip your posts. It's not like we're a committee putting together a proposal to submit to Turbine. We're just brainstorming some thoughts, why get all manic about it? We all know there's nothing official about any of this.

Your post said something like 'a short timer would lead to more exploits' and I don't understand that. I think you're using 'exploit' pretty liberally, while simultaneously painting every player as exploiters. Right now we could make a particular build, let's say The Exploiter since it has a nice exploitee name. With a respec, people might be able to turn current characters into The Exploiter type builds. We had The Exploiter before respec, we'd have it still after respec. Where did the imbalance enter?

Borror0
03-11-2009, 03:53 PM
I did not realize they "know" your character ate a tome. I cannot recall but what is the tome increase named in the ability after you eat it? Is this what you are referencing?
It's called an 'inherent' bonus and that's a proof that the game knows you ate a tome.

Another proof is that tomes' bonus don't stack.

Borror0, not having INT tomes retro (as with other abilties) has solely to do with giving characters higher base scores for skills which you would otherwise not be able to reach. Is this horrendous in terms of game balance?
Not really, given the power of skills. It'd be a loss on diversity but it would be very minor because skills are so weak in DDO that close to no one really puts points in Int for skills. We'd gain in friendliness for new players and plausibility of a respec, so the trade off seems worthwhile to me

If they make skills more powerful, it may be a problem but even there not really for as long as enough skills become more powerful.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 03:53 PM
My one question is, who are you compromising with? If it is other players then why? It seems to me that you need to convince not only the developers but the games producer as well.

I am personally against the respec idea and proposals. This game is about questing and should always be so. There is nothing wrong with the lower level quests when you run them at your level in fact many of them are better than the higher level quests. If you say that you do not want to run the same quests again and again to get to the capped level then you are a little disingenuous as when you reach your capp you run those quests over and over.

Ding ding ding! We have a winner. Convincing us is meaningless, its the Dev's and the producers as well as WoTC who hold the liscences that Turbine is allowed to use for this game. Compromising with us in more of a trying to garner popularity with the players....who are last in line in what gets done with the mechanics of the game.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 03:57 PM
Instead of accepting that you were wrong you splice random quotes and attempt to reconnect them in a revisionist way.
All these quotes were reply from one to another...

If the timer is too short, if I see it as imbalancing then I gave my reasons.
If that is the case post the link or a quote as I have missed it.

Maybe work on adjusting the timer instead of waving my suggestions away with your hand because you do not like it.
While I think the timer is fine, you want it to be longer. I ask you why and you have yet to explain.

SableShadow
03-11-2009, 03:57 PM
Ding ding ding! We have a winner. Convincing us is meaningless, its the Dev's and the producers as well as WoTC who hold the liscences that Turbine is allowed to use for this game. Compromising with us in more of a trying to garner popularity with the players....who are last in line in what gets done with the mechanics of the game.

Actually, the only point I see to the boards at all is hashing out potential issues around game ideas. Hash it out on the boards, knock the potential expoits out of it, and that's a little less work that has to be done dev side.

SableShadow
03-11-2009, 03:59 PM
While I think the timer is fine, you want it to be longer. I ask you why and you have yet to explain.

I'm not Q, but I'll give her a go: no "best spec machine". :)

Start with a long timer; devs can always shorten it.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 04:01 PM
Compromising with us in more of a trying to garner popularity with the players....who are last in line in what gets done with the mechanics of the game.
Let's assume, for a second, that the developers have the same hesitations as some of you guys then making a proposal that you guys were fine with increases the chances for us to see a respec being implemented.

If there concern is the reception such a feature would have, this thread work in that direction too.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 04:02 PM
I'm not Q, but I'll give her a go: no "best spec machine". :)
I have yet to hear why that is a bad thing for the game in the way my proposal is made, at the least.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 04:04 PM
But...it's okay to talk about it. If you don't want to that's fine, but to make assertions without explanations isn't fair to the discussion. Just means we should all skip your posts. It's not like we're a committee putting together a proposal to submit to Turbine. We're just brainstorming some thoughts, why get all manic about it? We all know there's nothing official about any of this.

Your post said something like 'a short timer would lead to more exploits' and I don't understand that. I think you're using 'exploit' pretty liberally, while simultaneously painting every player as exploiters. Right now we could make a particular build, let's say The Exploiter since it has a nice exploitee name. With a respec, people might be able to turn current characters into The Exploiter type builds. We had The Exploiter before respec, we'd have it still after respec. Where did the imbalance enter?

Yes, it is ok to talk about it. Go for it, but it does mean I have to talk about it. My feelings on why imbalance is bad for a game is my opinion that will be different for every person. Yet in the end, none of our feelings on it matters since it is Turbine's vision of it that really matters. It is their right to make it balanced as they wish. And no, I do not make an assurtion that imbalance is bad or good. I assurted that some things in this idea will create imbalance. Do you see the difference?

My comment about the short timer is about players being crafty. Players will always find loopholes for the "best" build that basically breaks a quest/raid. If the timer is too short than Turbine will have a harder time playing catch up to address the issue. Yes, right now we can make a toon like that but the difference is it will take us a great deal of time to reroll over and over to get what a respec character can do in the same amount of time. I know, we can just tell Turbine to look the other way, it is not important enough. You know, who cares about balance. Only problem is, they do and they will not change their beliefs on the whole matter simply because we think it is "unfun". We have to be realistic in this.

SableShadow
03-11-2009, 04:08 PM
I have yet to hear why that is a bad thing for the game in the way my proposal is made, at the least.

Citing a potential concern isn't the same as saying the concern exists.

Edit: just clarifying, now out of the convo...stuff to do today. ;)

rimble
03-11-2009, 04:10 PM
My comment about the short timer is about players being crafty. Players will always find loopholes for the "best" build that basically breaks a quest/raid. If the timer is too short than Turbine will have a harder time playing catch up to address the issue. Yes, right now we can make a toon like that but the difference is it will take us a great deal of time to reroll over and over to get what a respec character can do in the same amount of time. I know, we can just tell Turbine to look the other way, it is not important enough. You know, who cares about balance. Only problem is, they do and they will not change their beliefs on the whole matter simply because we think it is "unfun". We have to be realistic in this.

I appreciate you clarifying. I guess what I'm not seeing is that there aren't any particular builds that are more 'exploitive' than others. 'Exploits' are usually due to certain player actions causing the game to break.

Everyone suddenly respeccing to The Exploiter, or The Monster, or whatever is new and hot doesn't exploit anything. Maybe they could respec and tailor their character to the most recent mod and/or content that they run, but there's nothing exploitive about it. I can't picture anything in any build that Turbine has, or ever will, need to rush out a fix for because it's breaking the game. I can't see Turbine scrambling to patch something on some character build while players are rushing to respec to it quickly and blow through some Raid with their new optimal Raid-breaking build...and then going back and doing the same thing a different way the following week.

I certainly can imagine a respec system being exploited somehow, but I just don't see this. Probably the worst I can think of is levelling up a relatively easy character, and then respeccing over to a more optimal character that would have been horribly difficult to level up. However, that doesn't bother me. I was never a fan of systems that make you 'suffer through' character areas to get to the good stuff.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 04:11 PM
Players will always find loopholes for the "best" build that basically breaks a quest/raid.
Name me one build that is like that. One.

If the timer is too short than Turbine will have a harder time playing catch up to address the issue.
Explain to me how that is a problem.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 04:14 PM
Let's assume, for a second, that the developers have the same hesitations as some of you guys then making a proposal that you guys were fine with increases the chances for us to see a respec being implemented.

If there concern is the reception such a feature would have, this thread work in that direction too.

Assume? Neither one of us need to assume anything about it. They will see ALL the flaws in an idea since they are the ones who have to code it, correct? So pretending an idea is flawless or anyone suggesting imbalance is not important enough or anyone suggesting the details are not important enough shows me that they are not serious in their idea in the first place. Want to the dev's to even considers any idea? Find all the flaws before you present it to them AND give them something to actually work with. Compromise with...them. Not us.

You look at from the eyes of what would make the players happy, what we want. Look at it through their eyes, give them something that THEY want. You might not like it but wishing this idea is so is not enough.

bobbryan2
03-11-2009, 04:18 PM
Assume? Neither one of us need to assume anything about it. They will see ALL the flaws in an idea since they are the ones who have to code it, correct? So pretending an idea is flawless or anyone suggesting imbalance is not important enough or anyone suggesting the details are not important enough shows me that they are not serious in their idea in the first place. Want to the dev's to even considers any idea? Find all the flaws before you present it to them AND give them something to actually work with. Compromise with...them. Not us.

You look at from the eyes of what would make the players happy, what we want. Look at it through their eyes, give them something that THEY want. You might not like it but wishing this idea is so is not enough.

Says the person that defended his suggestion to the death, which allowed for infinitite skill points, or whatever it was.

Borror0
03-11-2009, 04:22 PM
Find all the flaws before you present it to them
LOL, are you trying that an idea has to be perfect to be implemented? I certainly hope not. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy)

Aesop
03-11-2009, 04:22 PM
I still say drop the character to half their XP.

Put them at the character creation screen right after race choice.
They can Adjust

Classes
Stats
Skills
Feats


but they still have to level back up the second half of their XP.


They keep everything else

Favor
Bound Items (placed into their bank Slots)
Tomes (Considered used at level 1)



Make it available after each Mod.


28s are upgraded to 32s if applicable

I know I get bored out of my skull grinding for gear so why make people do it mulitple times.

Int Tome Skill Points are an annoying Feature anyway that makes the system overly complicated just make it all retroactive and get it over with.

Losing Half the XP is a decent cost


Aesop

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 04:22 PM
Says the person that defended his suggestion to the death, which allowed for infinitite skill points, or whatever it was.

Or whatever it was? Why did you even bother with this? lol

bobbryan2
03-11-2009, 04:25 PM
Or whatever it was? Why did you even bother with this? lol

Because you were trying to pretend your suggestion didn't have GLARING holes in it... like allowing you to delevel without taking away your skill points!!!!

I mean... c'mon man...

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 04:29 PM
LOL, are you trying that an idea has to be perfect to be implemented? I certainly hope not. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy)

If I needed someone to give me the definition of what a Nirvana Fallacy is, I would have asked.

By the way, not all ideas are good ideas. Hate to break that to you.

Dymond
03-11-2009, 04:31 PM
/signed
I got about 4 pages in before it seemed like people were arguing for or against the same points.. But overall I like this idea.

I do like the suggestion about making the tokens level and class specific so that you can't magically level past your current level by running lower content and then applying all your tokens. Also I am usually the champion of the casual gamer but I admit I am not sure how Borrors plan can be seen as being pro-power gamer? Heck power gamer or Casual gamer, we all probably have some loot we really like whether it be a GS item or a Kundarak Delving suit pulled from VoN. Why not allow us to keep this? I think it benefits everybody.

The only thing I haven't really seen an elegant solution for is handling tomes, especially Int items that give extra skills at lower levels. Obviously the easy solution is to apply the increase at the level it was eaten but I'm not sure Turbine has a way of detecting this after the fact.

Overall a well thought out plan and I like it.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 04:33 PM
/signed
I got about 4 pages in before it seemed like people were arguing for or against the same points.. But overall I like this idea.

I do like the suggestion about making the tokens level and class specific so that you can't magically level past your current level by running lower content and then applying all your tokens. Also I am usually the champion of the casual gamer but I admit I am not sure how Borros plan can be seen as being pro-power gamer? Heck power gamer or Casual gamer, we all probably have some loot we really like whether it be a GS item or a Kundarak Delving suit pulled from VoN. Why not allow us to keep this? I think it benefits everybody.

The only thing I haven't really seen an elegant solution for is handling tomes, especially Int items that give extra skills at lower levels. Obviously the easy solution is to apply the increase at the level it was eaten but I'm not sure Turbine has a way of detecting this after the fact.

Overall a well thought out plan and I like it.



Simple solution that Turbine would need little coding for, remove all tomes when respecced.

bobbryan2
03-11-2009, 04:34 PM
Anyways, Borror... what I would do about timer is this.

First respec = 50k plat
Second respec = 250k plat
Third respec = 750k plat
etc...

And the cost completely resets after 6 months of no respecs. That way, you're not locked into your new build if you really screw it up, but it will cost you out the nose to continue to respec your character... pretty much doing away with any abuse of it, but giving you the flexibility to change it if you really really have to.

And of course, put a 1-2 week hard time limit on respecs.

I think that would make a respec very available for casual gamers, while preventing abuse from 'sploiters.

Cinwulf
03-11-2009, 04:34 PM
Simple solution that Turbine would need little coding for, remove all tomes when respecced.

or let int tomes be retro active.

rimble
03-11-2009, 04:36 PM
And the cost completely resets after 6 months of no respecs. That way, you're not locked into your new build if you really screw it up, but it will cost you out the nose to continue to respec your character... pretty much doing away with any abuse of it, but giving you the flexibility to change it if you really really have to.

I think it should be a little more egalitarian than that. Making the cost/wait equal between all tiers of player.

Also, the easiest tome solution (likely no coding) is to just leave 'em be.

bobbryan2
03-11-2009, 04:36 PM
or let int tomes be retro active.

Or even better... put minimum levels on tomes, and just have the tomes 'activate' when leveling to that level.

+1 = lvl 4
+2 = lvl 8
+3 = lvl 12
+4 = lvl 16
+5 = lvl 20

And just grandfather anyone in that's already eaten those tomes at lvl 1. (which in turn would give more incentive not to reroll those characters).

I've always thought it was stupid to fully outfit lvl 1 characters in +2 tomes anyway.

bobbryan2
03-11-2009, 04:37 PM
I think it should be a little more egalitarian than that. Making the cost/wait equal between all tiers of player.

Also, the easiest tome solution (likely no coding) is to just leave 'em be.

It is equal...

It's only unequal to frequent respeccers.

rimble
03-11-2009, 04:39 PM
It is equal...

It's only unequal to frequent respeccers.

No, what I mean is the uber characters can respec 3+ times with little hit in their bottom line...they're rolling in pp. Hell, they'll respec just to burn some pp to make room for more. The middle-class players are stuck with one every six months.

bobbryan2
03-11-2009, 04:42 PM
No, what I mean is the uber characters can respec 3+ times with little hit in their bottom line...they're rolling in pp. Hell, they'll respec just to burn some pp to make room for more. The middle-class players are stuck with one every six months.

750k plat isn't a little hit in anyone's bottom line. Not to mention that those are the same players that likely have 7-10 characters... so multiply that tenfold, and it's terrible.

But the main point is that NO ONE needs to respec 3 times within 6 months. The option is there if they really really want to, at exceptional cost.

I just am saying that I prefer that solution to a static 6 month interval. Give people options... but make those options harder and harder to justify.

Note: I'm also in favor of adding in xp penalties and rare item requirements on top of those...

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 04:44 PM
or let int tomes be retro active.

Or remove Int tomes and eat one at 1st level like those who reroll. Equal and fair to all.

bobbryan2
03-11-2009, 04:45 PM
Or remove Int tomes and eat one at 1st level like those who reroll. Equal and fair to all.

Hmm... removing +3 tomes from a character... one of the biggest grinds in the game... even more than shroud equipment, xp, or raid loot.

Interesting idea of fair and equal.

Cinwulf
03-11-2009, 04:45 PM
Or remove Int tomes and eat one at 1st level like those who reroll. Equal and fair to all.


I don't see how that's fair. We aren't talking about re-rolling

rimble
03-11-2009, 04:45 PM
I don't see how that's fair. We aren't talking about re-rolling

Not to mention you already ate one...how's that fair to have to eat a 2nd one...?

Dymond
03-11-2009, 04:46 PM
Simple solution that Turbine would need little coding for, remove all tomes when respecced.

It would suck (more for those +2 and 3 folk) but honestly it is the simplest solution and easiest to enforce because there is nothing TO enforce.

Cinwulf
03-11-2009, 04:46 PM
Not to mention you already ate one...how's that fair to have to eat a 2nd one...?


he must mean put the inherents as tomes in your inventory then respec and eat your tomes again?

Borror0
03-11-2009, 04:48 PM
Or even better... put minimum levels on tomes, and just have the tomes 'activate' when leveling to that level.
I don't disagree but it seems more of an headache for.. what in the end?

bobbryan2
03-11-2009, 04:49 PM
I don't disagree but it seems more of an headache for.. what in the end?

For getting people on board for a compromise?

:D

Hafeal
03-11-2009, 04:50 PM
It's called an 'inherent' bonus and that's a proof that the game knows you ate a tome.

Another proof is that tomes' bonus don't stack.

Not really, given the power of skills. It'd be a loss on diversity but it would be very minor because skills are so weak in DDO that close to no one really puts points in Int for skills. We'd gain in friendliness for new players and plausibility of a respec, so the trade off seems worthwhile to me

If they make skills more powerful, it may be a problem but even there not really for as long as enough skills become more powerful.

Thanks for the fill-in Borror0.

So, the only thing with tomes, as far as we know, is we don't know "when" they were eaten and as a result this plan "compromises" to give players who ate tomes a few extra skill points. It is a sacrifice I am willing to make to get a skill respec.

bobbryan2
03-11-2009, 04:52 PM
Thanks for the fill-in Borror0.

So, the only thing with tomes, as far as we know, is we don't know "when" they were eaten and as a result this plan "compromises" to give players who ate tomes a few extra skill points. It is a sacrifice I am willing to make to get a skill respec.

Yeah... another option is popping out the highest tomes upon rerolling, and letting them eat it at lvl 1... so that it doesn't create characters that are impossible without rerolling, but give them the earliest possible bonus.

rimble
03-11-2009, 04:53 PM
Yeah... another option is popping out the highest tomes upon rerolling, and letting them eat it at lvl 1... so that it doesn't create characters that are impossible without rerolling, but give them the earliest possible bonus.

Oh yeah, they most certainly should not have those bonuses at the 'creation' screen, but have them after you log in. That's an important distinction, and maybe people thought I meant it that way, but definitely not. No 64 point builds please...:p

Dymond
03-11-2009, 05:03 PM
Oh yeah, they most certainly should not have those bonuses at the 'creation' screen, but have them after you log in. That's an important distinction, and maybe people thought I meant it that way, but definitely not. No 64 point builds please...:p

So just give them back at level 1? I think thats our choices. Give the bonuses back at level 1 or don't give them at all. I know Turbine tracks the tomes (Inherent bonuses) I just don't think they track when they were eaten. If they don't it would almost have to be give them at level 1, give them after the respec(respec being a 'do it now', not some now some later) or don't give them at all.

bobbryan2
03-11-2009, 05:04 PM
So just give them back at level 1? I think thats our choices. Give the bonuses back at level 1 or don't give them at all. I know Turbine tracks the tomes (Inherent bonuses) I just don't think they track when they were eaten. If they don't it would almost have to be give them at level 1, give them after the respec(respec being a 'do it now', not some now some later) or don't give them at all.

Personally, I'd rather tomes have min lvls on top of that... but that's a diff issue.

sephiroth1084
03-11-2009, 06:25 PM
When the last token is turned in or destroyed.

That way, it penalizes more those respecing more levels by setting a "longer timer'.

I don't think they need to be penalized further since they are already having to actually relevel to some degree.


That is the only way I found to prevent players from collecting tokens.

If that is not seen as problematic, then they could code a 'maximum level' to it a bit in way they coded a minimum level?

Another option might be for the otkens to be destroyed if the character takes another class? You could change a fighter 16 to a fighter 6/ranger 10, but when that first ranger level gets picked up, the tokens all get destroyed.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 09:25 PM
I don't see how that's fair. We aren't talking about re-rolling


Exactly. Ya'll want something better than a reroll, compromise.

Dirac
03-11-2009, 10:03 PM
I like the compromise, too.

Concerning tomes, my original thought was that they should be lost, part of the payment for respec. However, if we want to keep tomes, I agree with the idea of having a min level on tomes: +1 ml8, +2 ml12, +3 ml16, +4 ml20 or some such thing. I thought not having one originally was a breathtaking oversight.

BlackSteel
03-11-2009, 10:08 PM
I like it if u take away the tokens. The price of the respec should be the releveling process. The perk of it is that you keep all your junk and tomes eaten. THAT sounds fair to me. A complete respec shouldnt be able to be done willy nilly.

dragonofsteel2
03-11-2009, 10:22 PM
1. Respec Race = Lose all bound items

2. Respec Classes = Stays at current level but must reaquire XP back to current XP before leveling any higher.

3. Respec Stats = Lose all consumed Tomes bound and unbound

4. Respec skills = No loss


I like this idea, plenty for the more want to do. Think should get plenty for respecing stats, this because it was your mistake. There has been nothing added to the game for reason to respec stats. The levels I can deal with the xp plenty even though the game has made changes which could hurt your idea of toon.



Hmm... removing +3 tomes from a character... one of the biggest grinds in the game... even more than shroud equipment, xp, or raid loot.

Interesting idea of fair and equal.

Hmm not really, there going to add more raids with +4tomes and there plenty out there right now can do get +3 tomes. The biggest grind to me is shroud items and titan gear. Grind boring same raid or quest over and over again. At least with +3 tomes u can get some variety. Remember the idea for respec came around because the changes made to the game, there has yet been feat added with stat require or enchantment, not here to reward those made mistakes. If did not figure out that made ability score mistakes by the time you are 16 and have raid gear is that Tribunes fault?

FluffyCalico
03-11-2009, 10:26 PM
Personally, I'd rather tomes have min lvls on top of that... but that's a diff issue.

Putting a min level on tomes would make it so noone today can make a character with as many skill points as the ones that currently exist. This would not be a good change without taking away those skill points from the old ones that would now no longer be able to be obtained. We don't need another way of making old players permently stonger than new ones.

SableShadow
03-11-2009, 11:10 PM
Exactly. Ya'll want something better than a reroll, compromise.

Agreed, that's the nature of compromise. I doubt I'd ever end up using a mechanic that stripped tomes, but that part would be irrelevant for someone leveling their first character and still learning the ropes.

BigBadBarry
03-11-2009, 11:12 PM
Overall I think this option is on the right track.

As I've said elsewhere the addition of capstones and PrC's using class types and level ranges (eg 18) means characters built before this became common knowledge should be able to - to a certain extent de-level and retrain to become pure (or pure-er)

This is important for example if they decide to re-balance how monk AC works. The Ranger 15 Monk 1 splash builds will be able to say "Yes my build is kinda-nerfed but I can drop the Monk level and Go pure from here and get the capstone so it kind of evens outs"


------------

Can I get a clarification Borro0 though on the concept of re-leveling?

Que (/gritted teeth on) might have a point that being able to "relevel" lower levels might make things a little "easy". (/gritted teeth off)

Example (?):

I have an old Rogue 11/Fighter 5 and with the new news of a rogue PrC to lvl 18 I want to drop 3 lvls of fighter for rogue levels.

Can I go to the the "re-spec" guy and be back to level 1 then walk over and do N/H/E Ringleader/Durks (etc) and become a lvl 3 rogue. Then go back to the trainer and take my 3 lvls of figher and my 10 lvls of rogue using my tokens - thus walking away a lvl 14 rogue/ 2 fighter

OR

DO i use all the tokens at once and walk away a lvl 12 rogue / 2 fighter and I need to get a full lvl to get to 15 ?


One's about a 20k xp cost to get back to 16 - the other is what ... 290K xp.

Quanefel
03-11-2009, 11:32 PM
Agreed, that's the nature of compromise. I doubt I'd ever end up using a mechanic that stripped tomes, but that part would be irrelevant for someone leveling their first character and still learning the ropes.

My way of thinking is that the Int tome would be stripped clean, the other tomes are not so much of a worry as that one. By the time this is even considered we will have 20 level cap already and unbound +3 and maybe +4/+5 tomes. Not much further you can go past +5 tomes that I am aware of. So, in knowing that it makes it clear by the time anything likes this is done, then the Int tome being wiped is not an issue anymore. If planned out you can still grab a fresh replacement Int tome to reuse in the respec phase just as anyone can do at 1st level now with a reroll. The dev's will not have to worry about the Int tome messing up the skills in any imbalancing way and the people respeccing will get what they want. Seems fine to me.


*edit* And it would fit well in a roleplaying/storytelling aspect as well. You are wiping the slate clean of a part of your character and because of it some Int point(tome bonus) is removed if there. It can be replaced with another tome within the process though.

SableShadow
03-11-2009, 11:44 PM
My way of thinking is that the Int tome would be stripped clean, the other tomes are not so much of a worry as that one. By the time this is even considered we will have 20 level cap already and unbound +3 and maybe +4/+5 tomes. Not much further you can go past +5 tomes that I am aware of. So, in knowing that it makes it clear by the time anything likes this is done, then the Int tome being wiped is not an issue anymore. If planned out you can still grab a fresh replacement Int tome to reuse in the respec phase just as anyone can do at 1st level now with a reroll. The dev's will not have to worry about the Int tome messing up the skills in any imbalancing way and the people respeccing will get what they want. Seems fine to me.

I follow your logic; I personally think just popping tomes off the character and popping them into inventory would work...then just eat them all at level 1 again. A "nuke all tomes" respec wouldn't hit all the goals folks have been talking about, but it would have a place in the game; vets wouldn't likely use it that much, but it would take some of the sting out of a newbies mistakes.

Newbies aren't going to be seeing much in the way of tomes until they hit their teens (imho), but they'll have some bound gear which may not be that easy for them to replace, so nuking tomes but keeping gear is, in my mind, a better move than nuking gear and keeping tomes.

It really just depends on what social dynamic Turbine (the DM) wants to achieve; for instance, I still think NPE and Hirelings were a good move on their part, though I wasn't their target audience.

BigBadBarry
03-11-2009, 11:44 PM
Int tome and skill points Compromise?

Rather than lose the +2/+3 tome completely (thus affecting other things), what about for the purposes of the respec/token system in question that the inherant bonus is not used at all throughout the whole process - just the base int.

Yes - you would end up with less skill points that you started with - especially if you took a +2 tome at level 1 (16 less skill points in this case) BUT this would be one of the known "costs" of respecing and would compromise with the complexity/stumbling block of implementation.

Don't want to "lose" your 16 skill points - then don't respec.

Uska
03-12-2009, 12:02 AM
I like the compromise, too.

Concerning tomes, my original thought was that they should be lost, part of the payment for respec. However, if we want to keep tomes, I agree with the idea of having a min level on tomes: +1 ml8, +2 ml12, +3 ml16, +4 ml20 or some such thing. I thought not having one originally was a breathtaking oversight.

I like min levels but I think your's are to high maybe about half what you have.

uhgungawa
03-12-2009, 12:06 AM
Read through a couple of pages. No matter what the out come is, some people are gonna be T'd off.

So here's my thought. Let people have one respec per server for every 12 months they have an active account. This would reward players for staying, and those that left for awhile could still add all thier active time.

The game has been out for three years, so they could give 3 respecs to those with enough time in.

Once again some might like it, while others hate it. But all in all, it seems like a good and not game breaking compermise

FluffyCalico
03-12-2009, 12:07 AM
I like min levels but I think your's are to high maybe about half what you have.

the general way it normally would work is don't hope for more than your level /4

level 4 +1
level 8 +2
level 12 +3
level 16 +4
level 20 +5

Quanefel
03-12-2009, 12:09 AM
I follow your logic; I personally think just popping tomes off the character and popping them into inventory would work...then just eat them all at level 1 again. A "nuke all tomes" respec wouldn't hit all the goals folks have been talking about, but it would have a place in the game; vets wouldn't likely use it that much, but it would take some of the sting out of a newbies mistakes.

Newbies aren't going to be seeing much in the way of tomes until they hit their teens (imho), but they'll have some bound gear which may not be that easy for them to replace, so nuking tomes but keeping gear is, in my mind, a better move than nuking gear and keeping tomes.

It really just depends on what social dynamic Turbine (the DM) wants to achieve; for instance, I still think NPE and Hirelings were a good move on their part, though I wasn't their target audience.

I am not sure that would be such a good thing. Consuming a tome should be final, no way to reform it into a new tome. If it is eaten, it is eaten. A nuke all tomes is not really needed since the contention is really only the Int tome, take that off the table and they can keep the other tomes for this. As more of a compromise to Turbine to not have to mess with the nightmare of recoding the skill/Int tome issue for this. Although I hope later we can get it worked out for a separate skill respec, that I would not mind myself even if I will never use it.

Yeah, I know the newbies won't really have much in the way of tomes. Now gear, yes they "might" have some that they would want to keep. I do not have a real issue with gear being kept. I do have an issue with it being used a point of reason for a full respec. If they stop talking about gear no one would care, because we don't really care much until its brought up. It needs to be brought back to what the main reasons are, more about fixing class levels, stats, and things along those lines. I think so at least.

SableShadow
03-12-2009, 12:27 AM
I am not sure that would be such a good thing. Consuming a tome should be final, no way to reform it into a new tome. If it is eaten, it is eaten. A nuke all tomes is not really needed since the contention is really only the Int tome, take that off the table and they can keep the other tomes for this. As more of a compromise to Turbine to not have to mess with the nightmare of recoding the skill/Int tome issue for this. Although I hope later we can get it worked out for a separate skill respec, that I would not mind myself even if I will never use it.

Well...sure, I was thinking "ease of coding mechanic"; since the tomes are all right there on your char sheet, it'd be fairly straightforward to strip the + and recreate the object...you could just as easily put the "+" back on later, sure, or in this case not add it again at all.


Yeah, I know the newbies won't really have much in the way of tomes. Now gear, yes they "might" have some that they would want to keep. I do not have a real issue with gear being kept.

When I capped 10, I was living off quest-chain end-rewards, hence "keep gear"...that was just my experience, though. If raid gear/GS is a heartburn, then give that stuff a different flag, so we're not lumping all "bound gear" into the same category.


I do have an issue with it being used a point of reason for a full respec. If they stop talking about gear no one would care, because we don't really care much until its brought up. It needs to be brought back to what the main reasons are, more about fixing class levels, stats, and things along those lines. I think so at least.

It's a gear game, and takes a lot more to gear up than it does to level, so raid gear and GS are going to be part of the conversation. I'd like it to be a little less of a gear game by toning the gear down in various ways, but I don't really see any way to do that at this point.

Edit: Heck, there's a place for a zero tome, zero raid gear respec in this game. It doesn't hit all the outlined goals, and would be largely pointless for vets, but it would still serve as training wheels for newbies. DDO is a weird kinda game, in that it looks like an archtype game (you have icons, and general expectations that go with those icons), but it isn't. Your healer or caster may be specialized in melee; your barbarian may have weapon finesse, etc etc. It's easier to break your first couple characters than it is in a lotta different games. The Paths, while I disagree on the specifics of many of them, seem to be an attempt to put an archtype face on the game and reduce the learning curve. A "keep favor and xp, but no raid gear" type of respec could extend that logic a little more....though it doesn't answer the whole "dynamic game/static characters" portion of the proposal.

Monkey_Archer
03-12-2009, 12:35 AM
Well, I think you're getting somewhere with the respec idea.....
This method seems to address many concerns, and is well thought through.

-I like the token idea
-I like that is seems feasible from a coding perspective
-I like that it would be usable and useful from a casual gamer's perspecitve

- I dont like the idea of complete class changes (even if you do have to relevel)
- I dont like the idea of low level characters running around with bound gear (specifically tomes) not normally attainable

An idea to address complete class changes:
-Scrap the re-leveling process. Have the character remain at whatever their current xp is (probably capped)
-Instead of re-leveling to change a class, have it done though the token system.
-Start with a base cost to respec. Lets say 10k plat, which increases for higher level characters
-The base cost will grant you class specific tokens equal to your current class (a 14wiz/2rogue would recive 2 rogue tokens and 14 wizard tokens that they can use in any order) This would allow you to basically reroll to change skills, alignment, and level order.
-To change classes you would add an additional cost on top of the base cost. For example: 1 Ebberron dragon shard per level (new shards added to game like siberus shards for feats) ... up to a maximum of maybe 3? levels per respec.
-For the 14wiz/2rogue to change to a pure wizard it would cost 2 Ebberron dragon shards and they would recive 14 wizard tokens and 2 ANY CLASS tokens, which they could use in any order

ahpook
03-12-2009, 12:36 AM
Generally I like it. The leveling tokens are a nice implementation. I would prefer to see a couple of tweaks to reduce the chance of abuse.

Timer: Instead of 2 months, have a respec lock out flag to be set when you complete your respec. No further respecs are allowed while the flag is set. Whenever a new mod is released all respec lock outs are cleared. In other words one respec per module and you cannot accumulate more than one respec at a time.

Level tokens expiration: I would rather not see a 20th level fighter change to a 14 fighter/6 ranger by taking levels 2-7 as ranger and jumping back to 20 using the tokens. I would suggest either that any gain of XP wipes all tokens or you cannot gain XP until you have used your tokens or discarded them. In other words, you need to use all your token at once for any tokens you wish to use. Any new class levels have to be taken at the high end of your levels.

sephiroth1084
03-12-2009, 03:59 AM
/not signed

What comprimise?

This is still all about the loot. Iit is not about some build mistake it is about loot. If your toon had zero loot you would re-roll them in a second if you found a flaw you didnt like. But because you have X number of pieces of raid loot you wont do it. I am in favor of this if ALL loot is destroyed at respec. The problem is nobody else would be in favor of this becasue this is still all about the loot. I am not in favor of this if you received zero respec tokens and had to grind XP back to level cap 100%. XP is not a limiting factor. Plat is not a limiting factor. If this is for the casual gamer who plays 5 hours a week, they don't have the stacks of uber loot anyway, so a respec that eliminates loot won't hurt them.

Someone stated in a previous thread that they are in favor of a respec becasue they only have one toon they play. They have finally gotten every piece of loot they want but they made some poor decisions while creating the toon so it is not perfect. They wish that that toon was perfect and want to have a re-roll to do so. What does that person do after that toon is perfect? What keeps them playing? There is no point to running that perfect toon any longer. Do you roll another toon? Isn't that the same as re-rolling? We need motavation to keep playing and striving to make the perfect toon is it. Eliminating that journey towards the perfect toon eliminates the need to play at all.

I will not agree to a respec that allows a faster method to the perfect toon with all the perfect gear to go with it. Is there a game out there that takes less time to get to cap?

Not just loot. I recently leveled a new paladin to 10, and decided that I really do miss intimidate. With a proper respec, I could have thrown in a level of fighter or rogue early and then gotten my character back. It took about 2 weeks to get to 10 (leveling with a friend brand new to the game, so taking it kinda slow). Now, I have to re-level a new character, but without my friends who I was running with because they are all level 10.

How about a newish player who gets a character up to around level 10-14, and realizes that they just don't have enough DPS, saves, HP, AC, or skill for whatever they were trying to do. What if that person has only this one character and is running with friends? They can reroll, but then they either force their friends to roll new characters, or have to level without them.

Finally, if Turbine changes something, we should be able to respond.

sephiroth1084
03-12-2009, 04:01 AM
At the very least, we should get a respec token that enables something similar to Borr's idea every time Turbine introduces new abilities, enhancements or uses for skills. For feat changes/additions, we should receive a free feat respec token (or several) that last for a reasonable period of time before disappearing (maybe 1 month).

Cold_Stele
03-12-2009, 04:23 AM
give the guys who worked it out something to gloat over.

Don't you play Barbarians?

I'd love to know what is you 'worked out' that gives you something to gloat over - lots of Str and Con and then you got to choose one feat after the five compulsary ones right?

Arianrhod
03-12-2009, 08:12 AM
Not just loot. I recently leveled a new paladin to 10, and decided that I really do miss intimidate. With a proper respec, I could have thrown in a level of fighter or rogue early and then gotten my character back. It took about 2 weeks to get to 10 (leveling with a friend brand new to the game, so taking it kinda slow). Now, I have to re-level a new character, but without my friends who I was running with because they are all level 10.

How about a newish player who gets a character up to around level 10-14, and realizes that they just don't have enough DPS, saves, HP, AC, or skill for whatever they were trying to do. What if that person has only this one character and is running with friends? They can reroll, but then they either force their friends to roll new characters, or have to level without them.

Finally, if Turbine changes something, we should be able to respond.

But the guy's point was that if the respec didn't include loot, people wouldn't go for it. How many people would suppoort a full respec system that allowed people to change any aspect of the character they wanted, without losing any exp or favor, but sacrificing all bound loot? Im guessing, maybe 2 of us. That's not many :)

FluffyCalico
03-12-2009, 08:18 AM
But the guy's point was that if the respec didn't include loot, people wouldn't go for it. How many people would suppoort a full respec system that allowed people to change any aspect of the character they wanted, without losing any exp or favor, but sacrificing all bound loot? Im guessing, maybe 2 of us. That's not many :)

Pretty much any causal with only quest rewards as bound loot.

Cinwulf
03-12-2009, 08:32 AM
Int tome and skill points Compromise?

Rather than lose the +2/+3 tome completely (thus affecting other things), what about for the purposes of the respec/token system in question that the inherant bonus is not used at all throughout the whole process - just the base int.

Yes - you would end up with less skill points that you started with - especially if you took a +2 tome at level 1 (16 less skill points in this case) BUT this would be one of the known "costs" of respecing and would compromise with the complexity/stumbling block of implementation.

Don't want to "lose" your 16 skill points - then don't respec.


The problem might be that a character ate a +3 int tome to add to his 10 intel to qualify for a feat like combat expertise. In this case I'd prefer a min lvl req instead of not counting tome boost to intel at all. I can understand not letting them have the boost at lvl 1 for the handful of extra skill points if that bothers people.

ps: I do appreciate the more civil discussion lately :) Not singling anyone out, but this thread as a whole.

Aganazer
03-12-2009, 09:14 AM
How about a newish player who gets a character up to around level 10-14, and realizes that they just don't have enough DPS, saves, HP, AC, or skill for whatever they were trying to do. What if that person has only this one character and is running with friends? They can reroll, but then they either force their friends to roll new characters, or have to level without them.

That is almost exactly the situation I am in. Although I made sure that my friends and I all had a solid plan for their character, I can tell you exactly what I would do if I had made a serious mistake on my character. I would lose interest in the game. Other games would start to sound more and more enticing.

That is something that I think a lot of the vets don't understand. They have been playing DDO for so long that they don't even consider the competition anymore. There are a lot of good games out there. It doesn't matter if DDO is fun or not, but what matters is if its more fun and rewarding than the other MMOG's. Character experimentation is one of DDO's strongest features. By making it more accessible it makes the whole game more appealing to potential subscribers that may be on the fence.

Zenako
03-12-2009, 10:22 AM
But the guy's point was that if the respec didn't include loot, people wouldn't go for it. How many people would suppoort a full respec system that allowed people to change any aspect of the character they wanted, without losing any exp or favor, but sacrificing all bound loot? Im guessing, maybe 2 of us. That's not many :)

But finding out how many would be up for something like that, would clarify the arguement a bit as well. Is it the core character that they need to fix (making loot not the issue) or is it a misfit of loot that they want to address. I know this is simplistic, but I recall that hardly anyone wanted to do a respect if they really had to start over on the tome/bound loot front. Saying in general, what would be the point.

Zenako
03-12-2009, 10:25 AM
That is almost exactly the situation I am in. Although I made sure that my friends and I all had a solid plan for their character, I can tell you exactly what I would do if I had made a serious mistake on my character. I would lose interest in the game. Other games would start to sound more and more enticing.

That is something that I think a lot of the vets don't understand. They have been playing DDO for so long that they don't even consider the competition anymore. There are a lot of good games out there. It doesn't matter if DDO is fun or not, but what matters is if its more fun and rewarding than the other MMOG's. Character experimentation is one of DDO's strongest features. By making it more accessible it makes the whole game more appealing to potential subscribers that may be on the fence.

So since character experimentation is a strong point, why don't groups like that create multiple characters to mix and match with. I know I did that when starting out. My friends and I all created 2 or 3 (or more) characters to run with. We leveled them all up around the same rate it seemed. This avoided tying anyone down to a single type of character that they might not enjoy as much once they play the game a bit. That seemed like the obvious solution to us back then (when you only had half the number of slots you have now), so it should still be an obvious solution.

sephiroth1084
03-12-2009, 10:33 AM
But the guy's point was that if the respec didn't include loot, people wouldn't go for it. How many people would suppoort a full respec system that allowed people to change any aspect of the character they wanted, without losing any exp or favor, but sacrificing all bound loot? Im guessing, maybe 2 of us. That's not many :)

Aside from the +2 Con tome that my pure paladin had read, there was no bound loot on him worth mentioning. And, though that was the only +2 Con tome I had, and one of only about 5 +2 tomes I've ever gotten, I still rerolled him. It isn't all about the loot.

Sure, that's a big part of it, and with good reason. My point, was that there are legit non-loot related reasons for supporting such a respec system, as you can see below.


That is almost exactly the situation I am in. Although I made sure that my friends and I all had a solid plan for their character, I can tell you exactly what I would do if I had made a serious mistake on my character. I would lose interest in the game. Other games would start to sound more and more enticing.

That is something that I think a lot of the vets don't understand. They have been playing DDO for so long that they don't even consider the competition anymore. There are a lot of good games out there. It doesn't matter if DDO is fun or not, but what matters is if its more fun and rewarding than the other MMOG's. Character experimentation is one of DDO's strongest features. By making it more accessible it makes the whole game more appealing to potential subscribers that may be on the fence.

feynman
03-12-2009, 10:35 AM
But finding out how many would be up for something like that, would clarify the arguement a bit as well. Is it the core character that they need to fix (making loot not the issue) or is it a misfit of loot that they want to address. I know this is simplistic, but I recall that hardly anyone wanted to do a respect if they really had to start over on the tome/bound loot front. Saying in general, what would be the point.

It's different things for different people; I might want to fix my 28-point cleric that I put too much into STR and CHA (yea, yea, it was my first character, OK?) without losing 3 +3 tomes, 2 greensteel items, and about 5 raid loot items, but someone else might want to change their alignment since DT armor came out so they can switch to chaosgardes.

The only way to address it all is to make it possible to change everything, repeatedly. I oppose any limits on it, but if you insist, I would be less upset at a time limit (1 week/character?) than at any other form of cost.

Oh, and the people who want some sort of mark on those who respec, do you really think that we believe that you aren't looking for a way to discriminate against them, e.g. not letting them into groups, guilds, etc?

Aganazer
03-12-2009, 11:33 AM
So since character experimentation is a strong point, why don't groups like that create multiple characters to mix and match with. I know I did that when starting out. My friends and I all created 2 or 3 (or more) characters to run with. We leveled them all up around the same rate it seemed. This avoided tying anyone down to a single type of character that they might not enjoy as much once they play the game a bit. That seemed like the obvious solution to us back then (when you only had half the number of slots you have now), so it should still be an obvious solution.

After unlocking Drow none of us want to repeat that content again. We have already done 1-7 content 5 or 6 times. Why repeat content when there are so many other games out there with content that we have never seen?

Zenako
03-12-2009, 11:42 AM
After unlocking Drow none of us want to repeat that content again. We have already done 1-7 content 5 or 6 times. Why repeat content when there are so many other games out there with content that we have never seen?

Curious on this point, did you really exhaust the level 1 to 7 content 5 or 6 times, or just run those same 10 quests everyone power levels on 5 or 6 times. There are a ton of interesting quests that are perhaps not on the main highway of power leveling in those level ranges that way too many players ignore. They make perfect sessions for a small group like that. I find I usually level up beyond them way before I run out things to run.

Aganazer
03-12-2009, 12:07 PM
Curious on this point, did you really exhaust the level 1 to 7 content 5 or 6 times, or just run those same 10 quests everyone power levels on 5 or 6 times. There are a ton of interesting quests that are perhaps not on the main highway of power leveling in those level ranges that way too many players ignore. They make perfect sessions for a small group like that. I find I usually level up beyond them way before I run out things to run.

Yes, totally exhausted 1-5, completed most of 6, and a few 7 on the way to unlocking Drow. First my wife and I did them all three times for favor. Then another friend wanted to do it even though he scoffed at joining us the first time, then another friend joined the bandwagon who subsequently quit the game after repeating content even a few times. We did mix in a few different characters for variety, but it was generally easier to use our first set of characters since we already had it unlocked for elite.

Since then we have been checking off EVERY quest at every level before taking on the next level's quests. Its worked out well and we haven't had to repeat any content since unlocking our Drow. No power leveling. Completing ALL optionals whenever we are able. Taking our time. Its been great, but I am concerned about having enough content without repeating quests starting at 11 or 12.

I don't mind repeating content 2-3 times if its a quest that is well done, but after 5 or 6 repeats I've lost all motivation to return. We've tried making a few alts when we are missing a key party member, but its never as fun since we're so tired of the same content after the Drow grind. As much as I've enjoyed DDO we'd rather play another game. Even multiplayer NWN2 can scratch that D&D itch and its got gobs of content.

If one of the four static party members became dissatisfied with their character and quit, we would probably all quit the game. Its sad, but true. Of course its not likely to happen because we all did our homework and built our characters very well.

Arianrhod
03-12-2009, 12:14 PM
.

If one of the four static party members became dissatisfied with their character and quit, we would probably all quit the game. Its sad, but true. Of course its not likely to happen because we all did our homework and built our characters very well.

I suspect there may be a lot of people who play this way (it's how my friends and I play as well), and this is why I keep trying to advocate (though I think it gets lost in the roar of the RAIDRAIDRAID crowd, heh) for keeping plenty of content at all levels completable with this playstyle. Have enough quests for these groups to level up without having to repeat stuff, and have those quests completable without rare gear or piles of consumables, and you'll keep the casuals. Dissatisfaction with build (at least on the part of casuals) comes more from struggling through quests at level on Normal, and running out of quests before leveling, than any feeling of inadequacy next to the powergamers.

Zenako
03-12-2009, 12:18 PM
I suspect there may be a lot of people who play this way (it's how my friends and I play as well), and this is why I keep trying to advocate (though I think it gets lost in the roar of the RAIDRAIDRAID crowd, heh) for keeping plenty of content at all levels completable with this playstyle. Have enough quests for these groups to level up without having to repeat stuff, and have those quests completable without rare gear or piles of consumables, and you'll keep the casuals. Dissatisfaction with build (at least on the part of casuals) comes more from struggling through quests at level on Normal, and running out of quests before leveling, than any feeling of inadequacy next to the powergamers.

Using the explorer areas for EXP is one effective way to get more EXP while leveling. CH is "easy", Waterworks is a drag to get the max slayer, but worth it while getting the rares, SH is a real tester better handled at the upper end unless experienced, TR is good for some pretty easy EXP, Three Barrel Cove is a great explorer area with lots of shrines (compared to the one each in TR and SH) and tons of stuff to fight in different ways, and by then you are onto Sorrowdusk... Sure there is no favor from those areas, but there is loot and experience to be gained, significant chunks of experience.

Arianrhod
03-12-2009, 12:32 PM
Using the explorer areas for EXP is one effective way to get more EXP while leveling. CH is "easy", Waterworks is a drag to get the max slayer, but worth it while getting the rares, SH is a real tester better handled at the upper end unless experienced, TR is good for some pretty easy EXP, Three Barrel Cove is a great explorer area with lots of shrines (compared to the one each in TR and SH) and tons of stuff to fight in different ways, and by then you are onto Sorrowdusk... Sure there is no favor from those areas, but there is loot and experience to be gained, significant chunks of experience.

True, but it can be quite a shock to go from Sorrowdusk to Ataraxia's Haven. The abrupt increase in difficulty level between, say, 9 & 10 can be, shall we say, a bit offputting to casuals leveling their first characters :)

Borror0
03-12-2009, 12:37 PM
Level tokens expiration: I would rather not see a 20th level fighter change to a 14 fighter/6 ranger by taking levels 2-7 as ranger and jumping back to 20 using the tokens. I would suggest either that any gain of XP wipes all tokens or you cannot gain XP until you have used your tokens or discarded them. In other words, you need to use all your token at once for any tokens you wish to use. Any new class levels have to be taken at the high end of your levels.
While I see where you're getting at, level order matters when building a character.

Any respec method that do not account that reality will be a poor one. Just think of a ranger respec'ing to a rogue splash for traps. If he can take the splash at level two, his character can be build. "Force" him to take the rogue level at level 1, and the character is impossible.

This increases the low level activity, so I see this as a trade off.

Borror0
03-12-2009, 12:45 PM
Is it the core character that they need to fix (making loot not the issue) or is it a misfit of loot that they want to address.
Well, the general idea is that losing loot represents the biggest cost in rerolling.

Oh, sure, running the low level content with a character nearly identical with the one we had before may be irritating but the biggest cost really is losing all the bound gear because it takes so much time and so much grind to return to where we were at before.

...and, most importantly, that part won't be fun for us.

Aganazer
03-12-2009, 12:45 PM
Using the explorer areas for EXP is one effective way to get more EXP while leveling. CH is "easy", Waterworks is a drag to get the max slayer, but worth it while getting the rares, SH is a real tester better handled at the upper end unless experienced, TR is good for some pretty easy EXP, Three Barrel Cove is a great explorer area with lots of shrines (compared to the one each in TR and SH) and tons of stuff to fight in different ways, and by then you are onto Sorrowdusk... Sure there is no favor from those areas, but there is loot and experience to be gained, significant chunks of experience.

It is good and easy exp. Whenever one of our members is out for the night this is what we usually do. We have completed all the explorer quests up to and including Ataraxia's Haven so far. The slayer quests and rare boss quests require too many repeats though. My favorite was probably the Searing Heights. I wish there were some real quests there.

Looking at the quest list, we may have to make a hard decision at about level 12. Repeat or unsub. We'll cross that bridge when we get to it though. I've had too many years of creating and leading guilds (UO and EQ), organizing and leading raids (WoW), and dealing with all the BS involved in PUG's. There are plenty of games we can play that fit our casual play style with more coming out faster than we can complete them.

Borror0
03-12-2009, 12:49 PM
Looking at the quest list, we may have to make a hard decision at about level 12. Repeat or unsub.
I'd be interested in a post of your whole impression, from beginning to end, when you either unsub or reach cap. Feedback, reasons others quit, etc.

I know that may be a lot to ask, but I'd love to read/hear it.:o

Strakeln
03-12-2009, 01:17 PM
From Tarrant, in one of the closed respec threads:
There are many threads about this topic already, please use one of them.

Hmmmm.

So... uh.... do you think that maybe... just possibly... you should shove a dev into one of these threads and have him/her talk about it? Or create a locked thread with an official Turbine response?

Oh, right, that's communication with your customers. So I guess this time we'll take the usual: you tell us you'll release the info to 3rd party sites. Which is great, because we've been so overburdened with info since that change and all...

SableShadow
03-12-2009, 02:14 PM
So... uh.... do you think that maybe... just possibly... you should shove a dev into one of these threads and have him/her talk about it? Or create a locked thread with an official Turbine response?

It takes time to craft post for a broad audience, and, if Turbine doesn't already have something on the drawing board, even more time to kick around various options. I can't really blame a dev for not wanting to step into the maelstrom. :)


Oh, right, that's communication with your customers. So I guess this time we'll take the usual: you tell us you'll release the info to 3rd party sites. Which is great, because we've been so overburdened with info since that change and all...

I don't think this is entirely fair; there's a trade show coming up, and likely they've been told by powers on high "don't steal the thunder"....that's bound to make them significantly more cautious than normal about commenting on game mechanics.

Borror0
03-12-2009, 02:18 PM
I don't think this is entirely fair; there's a trade show coming up, and likely they've been told by powers on high "don't steal the thunder"....that's bound to make them significantly more cautious than normal about commenting on game mechanics.
...they had two other occasions to show off. Took none of them.

Was there even screenshots of Shavarath on other third party website before we saw them? Of course not. Did Kate post her letter on a third party website? Of course not. Did we get any information in the year since they implemented this new system? No, we did not.

If that truly was their intention at first, they have a short memory.

SableShadow
03-12-2009, 02:31 PM
...they had two other occasions to show off. Took none of them.

Was there even screenshots of Shavarath on other third party website before we saw them? Of course not. Did Kate post her letter on a third party website? Of course not. Did we get any information in the year since they implemented this new system? No, we did not.

If that truly was their intention at first, they have a short memory.

Yeah, I could just be full of it. :)

sephiroth1084
03-12-2009, 02:44 PM
Yeah, I could just be full of it. :)

More likely naively hopeful? :rolleyes: But then, aren't we all?

SableShadow
03-12-2009, 02:54 PM
More likely naively hopeful? :rolleyes: But then, aren't we all?

Well...I don't track 3rd party sites; I mean, if there's a game out there that might interest me, I'll track its progress, but I don't particularly feel the need to keep up on what's hot and what's not (I have friends of mine that do that for me....).

On the other hand...if I were in a devs shoes, I'd be trading favors with other devs so I wouldn't have to respond to the boards. Too much of my time would be eaten up trying to craft responses to minimize (not eliminate, minimize) the number of people any one of my individual posts would **** off.

sephiroth1084
03-12-2009, 03:04 PM
Well...I don't track 3rd party sites; I mean, if there's a game out there that might interest me, I'll track its progress, but I don't particularly feel the need to keep up on what's hot and what's not (I have friends of mine that do that for me....).

On the other hand...if I were in a devs shoes, I'd be trading favors with other devs so I wouldn't have to respond to the boards. Too much of my time would be eaten up trying to craft responses to minimize (not eliminate, minimize) the number of people any one of my individual posts would **** off.

An undoubtedly unenviable task.

ahpook
03-12-2009, 04:53 PM
While I see where you're getting at, level order matters when building a character.

Any respec method that do not account that reality will be a poor one. Just think of a ranger respec'ing to a rogue splash for traps. If he can take the splash at level two, his character can be build. "Force" him to take the rogue level at level 1, and the character is impossible.

This increases the low level activity, so I see this as a trade off.

You already place the restriction that level 1 needs to be a previously taken class:

(he can only use, as starting class, a class he had levels of previously however)

And isn't the only level where order matters at level 1 (for skill points)? If so, then my restriction is not an issue. The only thing that changes is when you can take classes that you didn't previously take. Truthully, if order is that important to you that you have to take that ranger level at level 2 instead of 16, I think you are probably more than capable at re-levelling to get the effect you want.

Borror0
03-12-2009, 05:01 PM
You already place the restriction that level 1 needs to be a previously taken class and isn't the only level where order matters at level 1 (for skill points)?
Of course not.

Take the character planner and replicate the two following builds:

Human. One rogue and then fifteen ranger. 12 Int. Maximum rank in rogue skills.
Human. Fifteen ranger and one rogue. 12 Int. Maximum rank in rogue skills.

That's only for skills.

The level at which you take bonus feats may also matter.

Gunga
03-12-2009, 05:10 PM
Don't you play Barbarians?

I'd love to know what is you 'worked out' that gives you something to gloat over - lots of Str and Con and then you got to choose one feat after the five compulsary ones right?

I've played every class in the game. I've had 14 capped toons, 2 of which I have deleted. They were deleted because I ****ed them up. My Pali, first toon ever, was built as a well rounded P&P Pali. NG, got tossed sometime before the shroud came out. My Warchanter WF Bard was built during MOD 5...I liked the idea of it. That's about as much as I ever liked. He was great up until about 10th level, when he really started getting his ass kicked and not really meleeing as well. He got to 15, did one shroud, died a lot and got deleted.

They were toons that didn't work for me. No Turbine whining here, pal.

So what changes did Turbine make that have MADE you reroll a tune?

ahpook
03-12-2009, 05:58 PM
Of course not.

Take the character planner and replicate the two following builds:

Human. One rogue and then fifteen ranger. 12 Int. Maximum rank in rogue skills.
Human. Fifteen ranger and one rogue. 12 Int. Maximum rank in rogue skills.

That's only for skills.

Sorry, I don't get it. Isn't the difference still whether you take rogue at level 1 or not?



The level at which you take bonus feats may also matter.
That makes sense. I hadn't thought through bonus feats and min levels on feats. Practically, however, I am still not certain how often it would be an issue and in the cases where it is whether it would be onerous to require more relevelling through XP.

Perhaps there is some middle ground that allows you to insert some new classes but not allow you to gain them all the low end of the XP spectrum.

SableShadow
03-12-2009, 06:41 PM
Sorry, I don't get it. Isn't the difference still whether you take rogue at level 1 or not?

Once you take the rogue level, any points you put in a rogue skill are no longer cross class. Taking a rogue level at 2 potentially gives you more than if you took the rogue level at 4 (though I don't care to do the math).

Xyfiel
03-12-2009, 06:50 PM
I'll back anything if you include giving Drow a way to get their proper SR levels and/or mirror image.;)

Prot from arrows wouldn't be bad either.

Borror0
03-13-2009, 04:33 AM
Sorry, I don't get it. Isn't the difference still whether you take rogue at level 1 or not?
SableShadow already explained it, but just try it. Take the ranger, rogue than all the way ranger and than compare to a all ranger and then one rogue at level 16.

Perhaps there is some middle ground that allows you to insert some new classes but not allow you to gain them all the low end of the XP spectrum.
Perhaps, but everyone keeps telling me that I want to 'give everyone a free pass' rather than finding a way around it.

Aesop
03-13-2009, 05:42 AM
Perhaps, but everyone keeps telling me that I want to 'give everyone a free pass' rather than finding a way around it.

I object... I never said that you wanted to give everyone a free pass. :D

Again I still say a reroll costs half your XP and you get to keep everything

this means the last couple of levels you have to re-earn, but you get to choose what your Stats are, what Classes you take, what Feat you take, what skills you take and you don't loose the items or favor you've been grinding out for the last couple of years. Because I tell ya the thing that pushes me away from games more than anything else is the grind. It feels like work and not fun when you constantly have to grind.


Aesop

Borror0
03-13-2009, 05:59 AM
I object... I never said that you wanted to give everyone a free pass. :D

Again I still say a reroll costs half your XP and you get to keep everything
The problem is that it's quite a spanking if Turbine ever swings the nerf bat pretty hard.

Cold_Stele
03-13-2009, 06:01 AM
So what changes did Turbine make that have MADE you reroll a tune?

I have a 10 Barb/6 Ranger with GS Heavy Picks and dual Deathnips wasted on him now, not deleted him yet but rerolled THF WF to replace him.

Ironically enough if I'd have gone 14/2 with the intention of exploiting bugs in Fred's respec checking mechanisms he'd still be a first rate toon in mod 9.

Aesop
03-13-2009, 06:07 AM
The problem is that it's quite a spanking if Turbine ever swings the nerf bat pretty hard.

Well if I could get the wiki up I'd get the specific numbers... but really it s not that bad


for a comparison

level 20 Experience in PnP is 190000 xp

half that is 95000 xp

that's a little ways into level 14


DDO is roughly 10 times the xp once you break out past level 4 or so; so the break down would be about the same.

Releveling 6 levels sounds a lot better and easier than 20 :D ... especially when you don't have to get a new Chattering Ring and +3 Tome

Aesop

Borror0
03-13-2009, 06:16 AM
that's a little ways into level 14
Yeah. Almost gets you your second AP.

It seems harder to code*, makes the 'resetting repetition counts' necessary and is am harder cost, though.

*Assuming you do that with the 'token method'. Otherwise, it's even harder.

EDIT: Actually, it risks of being level 15 and 105,499 XP

RazorrX
03-13-2009, 11:27 AM
Goals:

Allowing players to adapt to game change.
Being affordable for everyone, casual and hardcore alike.
Trying to address (or reduce) some of the anti-respec fears.
Avoiding hundreds of nearly uncodable restrictions.
The only issue I have is that even this allows for changes that the game did not break. IE a fighter can take 1 level of mage then respec to mage and has basically changed his entire character. Sure he starts over at 1, but he has all his bound gear, etc. That is pretty much going against what you are saying is the purpose of Respecing. It is no longer fixing something the game broke and more of a change my class but keep my gear thing.

I do like your idea as far as how it would help the people who felt they needed a respec, but there is still a big way to exploit it. We all know that the monk wis bonus to ac is over powered on splash builds, everyone who has taken it should understand that there will most likely be a 'nerf' to it. This would fix that I guess, but in a way they are making thier beds now, so they should really lie in it. Also since we have seen the capstones it makes pure builds a bit more desirable, so those who multiclassed may want to change that. I can see trying to help those, i really can. And I can almost support this for that.


Basic idea:
When a character has to respec, he talks to an NPC (I'll leave the aspect lore out for now) that pops out the equivalent of the character creation screen. The players rebuilds the character as he would wants it to be (he can only use, as starting class, a class he had levels of previously however). Once the player is done, he confirms his choice and his character is transformed back to a level 1 character of the class he picked.

The NPC also gives him 'class level token' for each class levels he had. For an example, a level 16 fighter will be given 15 'fighter class tokens'. For a 14 wizard/2 rogue that picked rogue as starting class, he will receive 14 'wizard class tokens' and 1 'rogue class token'. (This could be changed into a percentage of tokens if necessary.)

This could be done in a quest like the dragonmark one, but have when you leave the quest all tokens are lost. That way you level up all at once, or to a point, but you do not get to come back and level more later. Respecing should not be too easy.


Favor, tomes and equipment are kept.

Not tomes. Keeping Tomes makes it very unfair and unequal to new players. No new player would be able to have prime stats as high as a tome eaters. This makes a huge difference on starting skills, etc. and is inherently unfair. The argument that new players should gain access to 32pt builds is based on this very arguement. Equipement, okay, favor, okay but tomes should be wiped. For one thing it would make it easier to code.


Timer:

I like either of those two proposals:

Fixed one to two month timer
Smaller timer, at first, but goes up with frequency use (and slowly reduces if not used)


I am for a limited number per account that is increased every game birthday. Say you start with 3 and get 1 per year during the great birthday bash.



Advantages:
Does not seem impossible to code.
Can easily be used to adapt game changes.
Increases the quantity of players at lower levels.*
Reduces the cheesiness by making it a pain to change class drastically.
Mimics more closely (although not perfectly) the tested models found in other MMOs.


Number 2 is a vital thing for me, You should not be respecing because you want to. It should be something that has harmed your character to the point of screwing it up as far as usefullness goes.

I do not think you should EVER be able to repec race. Many are going to want to respec to half orc because they feel they would be more uber as a barb, etc. but the half orc will not make thier dwarf any less a fighter.

Wish there was a way to stop an exploit on classes, but doubt that can be done.

New race and new class should equal reroll.

SO on the whole I support the concept here.

Gunga
03-13-2009, 11:33 AM
I have a 10 Barb/6 Ranger with GS Heavy Picks and dual Deathnips wasted on him now, not deleted him yet but rerolled THF WF to replace him.

Ironically enough if I'd have gone 14/2 with the intention of exploiting bugs in Fred's respec checking mechanisms he'd still be a first rate toon in mod 9.

He's still viable. In fact, 12/6/2 Barb/Ranger/Rogue with FBII, Tempest and Evasion is a great melee toon and could be a lot of fun. What's the problem?

Mine is 14/2 waiting for tempest. She's a much slower melee than yours is, but I'm a bit more patient.

Cold_Stele
03-13-2009, 12:23 PM
He's still viable. In fact, 12/6/2 Barb/Ranger/Rogue with FBII, Tempest and Evasion is a great melee toon and could be a lot of fun. What's the problem?

What's the problem with a TWF Tempest Frenzied Barb? Come on...TWF...Tempest...Frenzy... those three words are really going to be getting me a lot of invites into groups right?

You don't strike me as the type of guy who be satisfied to make do with playing a sub optimal 'viable' build. Me neither.


Mine is 14/2 waiting for tempest. She's a much slower melee than yours is, but I'm a but more patient.

Patience had nothing to do with it - we both decided which we wanted first, Crit Rage or Tempest - you won the mental coin toss, I lost, nothing more.

That one choice means one toon excels and the other gets relegated to 'viable', all based on changes Turbine made to an enhancement that's been in game for what, 18 months? And no, you don't see me whining about Trbine either.

Gunga
03-13-2009, 12:44 PM
What's the problem with a TWF Tempest Frenzied Barb? Come on...TWF...Tempest...Frenzy... those three words are really going to be getting me a lot of invites into groups right?

You don't strike me as the type of guy who be satisfied to make do with playing a sub optimal 'viable' build. Me neither.



Patience had nothing to do with it - we both decided which we wanted first, Crit Rage or Tempest - you won the mental coin toss, I lost, nothing more.

That one choice means one toon excels and the other gets relegated to 'viable', all based on changes Turbine made to an enhancement that's been in game for what, 18 months? And no, you don't see me whining about Trbine either.

I disagree. Your post is just another panicky kneejerk. Do you run around after all of those number crunching posts? They are very informative snapshots of what is going on in a perfect and isolated world, but they don't make the toon. You do. I have a twf barb started back in the LoD days. He was going to be 18/2 barb/fighter until I got tired of not being able to whip a wand. Now he's 12/2/2 Barb/Fig/Ran. He's the highest DPS toon I have. No one takes agro from me. I steal agro with my vorpals and PA turned off.

He's a viable toon even though he wasn't conceived in a calulator with all of the available enhancements and capstone laid out before me.

People should stop whining, pull their needy cupped little gimme hands back to their sides, and wait until the new mod is out. Maybe your toon isn't gimped. Maybe the way you think is.

Cold_Stele
03-13-2009, 01:14 PM
You're supposed to be a smart guy, see if you can work this one out...

What build can kill itself faster than any other in game? I even have Tempest to do it 10% faster than any other TWF crazy enough to take FB.

Think that's BS? YOU take FB instead of Crit Rage on your guy.

No I thought not.

And you STILL haven't heard me whining about Turbine, or making 'panicky, knee jerk' comments.

Gunga
03-13-2009, 01:27 PM
You're supposed to be a smart guy, see if you can work this one out...

What build can kill itself faster than any other in game? I even have Tempest to do it 10% faster than any other TWF crazy enough to take FB.

Think that's BS? YOU take FB instead of Crit Rage on your guy.

No I thought not.

And you STILL haven't heard me whining about Turbine, or making 'panicky, knee jerk' comments.

But you need a respec system...

Cold_Stele
03-13-2009, 01:56 PM
But you need a respec system...

Nice response - totally avoid my point and go fishing for something else to have a go at, eh?

Just like I haven't been whining or making 'panicky, knee jerk comments' on these threads, neither have I made a single statement for or against respec.

sephiroth1084
03-14-2009, 05:46 PM
[/list]
Not tomes. Keeping Tomes makes it very unfair and unequal to new players. No new player would be able to have prime stats as high as a tome eaters. This makes a huge difference on starting skills, etc. and is inherently unfair. The argument that new players should gain access to 32pt builds is based on this very arguement. Equipement, okay, favor, okay but tomes should be wiped. For one thing it would make it easier to code.

No new player can have stats as high as 32 pt. characters. No new player can have lvl 2+ stats as high as vets. It's part of the reward for being a long-time player. Also, that new player would be able to respec and read a tome when he gets one, just like anybody else.

I see no reason for someone to lose their hard-earned tomes upon respec. I do, however, feel that permanent (lvl points and tomes) changes to Int should retroactively increase skill points. This could be a little difficult to code, but worthwhile, I believe. That would solve most tome-related issues as far as respec goes.

Quanefel
03-14-2009, 05:57 PM
No new player can have stats as high as 32 pt. characters. No new player can have lvl 2+ stats as high as vets. It's part of the reward for being a long-time player. Also, that new player would be able to respec and read a tome when he gets one, just like anybody else.

I see no reason for someone to lose their hard-earned tomes upon respec. I do, however, feel that permanent (lvl points and tomes) changes to Int should retroactively increase skill points. This could be a little difficult to code, but worthwhile, I believe. That would solve most tome-related issues as far as respec goes.

I have brought this up earlier. Personally I see the Int tome in something like a skill respec preventing Turbine from coding that type of respec out. They already said they are having problems with it, so if we as players remove that as an obstacle for them then they might have an easier time coding it because it will not be a monkey on their backs. The other tomes they can keep as inherent bonus, that is not a problem. But if the Int tomes are the issue for them, we need to compromise and help make their job easier if we really want a skill respec faster. Besides, if done and the Int tomes are removed from the intial skill respec coding, we can eat an Int tome later after the skill respec is added to get all our skill points back and it allows everyone across the board to get the skills they want when they find an Int tome. I hope that made sense.

branmakmuffin
03-15-2009, 12:13 PM
I do, however, feel that permanent (lvl points and tomes) changes to Int should retroactively increase skill points.
If by this you mean that a player should be able to allocate skill points that would have been awarded to a character at previous levels if the character's INT had been then what it is now, that makes no sense from a realism point of view. The way D&D works, learning a skill is based on how smart a character is at the time it learns the skill. Getting smarter now shouldn't make the character a better learner then.

I have no idea how D&D works in this regard, but I would never allow such thing if I were DMing.

Steiner-Davion
03-15-2009, 12:22 PM
Getting warmer

still have a few issues though

here is one
"The NPC also gives him 'class level token' for each class levels he had. For an example, a level 16 fighter will be given 15 'fighter class tokens'. For a 14 wizard/2 rogue that picked rogue as starting class, he will receive 14 'wizard class tokens' and 1 'rogue class token'. (This could be changed into a percentage of tokens if necessary.)"

So if I am a 16 wizard I can do this and then level up to level 5 and then pop my 15 tokens and be 20 without workng for 17-20?

I know this is not what you intended but we need something to prevent this.

How are you addressing tomes? Specifically INT

Actually I think he addressed this a bit further on, saying that once you reach your "old character level" (16 in this case, all remain level tokens would be destroyed.

Steiner-Davion
03-15-2009, 12:24 PM
Issue with this is then if you ate a int tome after level 1 you NEED to respec just to gain the points from previous levels. While I don't think super punishment is needed for respec I can't support a reward for doing it beond correcting mistakes or changes in the game.
Perhaps all toons reguardless should get back int skill points when they eat a tome.

I'm not entirely sureI know what you mean by "INT Skill Points" When you eat a tome? Would these be sometihng akin to the level up attribute points you get, meaning that 1 point of INT costs 1 INT Skill point?

Steiner-Davion
03-15-2009, 12:33 PM
Why not just make them regain all the XP? This, combined with first time bonuses and the "You have repeated this quest X times" mechanism, would limit the frequency people would be able to respec.

Some benefits:

1) more low/mid level content being run as people relevel
2) more of the less popular quests being run (repeated STK 15 times, where do we go this time?)
3) less coding (no need for tokens)

Well if you make people regain all the XP, they (some people) simply will not be able to gain much XP. One of the biggest problems I see with DDO, is that there are some quests which are jsut not worth doing for any reaosn other than FAVOR, as they give terrible XP and offer absolutely no rewards. Combine their lack of XP, with repetivie quest running penaltie,s and you are soon at zero XP.

THen take into consideration quests like the VON series, whihc require you to rerun quests over and over to flag for the Raid. You have 20 Dragon Raids under your belt, well now as you are regaining your XP, there is no point in running that excellent quest, because you will get no XP for the flaggin quests and little for VON 5 and none for 6.